Jump to content

Archived

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

RumHam

R+L=J v.161

Recommended Posts

There are a surprising number of people out there who refuse to believe the world is round even though it's been proven through math and like, people circumnavigating it and going into space and seeing it. 

So yeah, I'm not shocked. 

Also everyone knows Jon's true father is the chemtrails. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, The Wolves said:

I don't get how people hold on to this theory when Viserys saw Dany being born. GRRM said that Dany was born nine months after the sack, and other things. 

Not to be condescending, but I remember I read that someone had once read about someone who asked GRRM how much older than Dany Jon was, which he replied "approximately 9 months", but not "Dany was born 9 months after the sack."

I would love it if you could give me a source on where GRRM said what you claim he said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, MtnLion said:

You are absolutely correct.  Some do not want to accept that it was a fortnight between Rhaella's rape and the sack of King's Landing, because Rhaegar left King's Landing after the rape, and died at the Trident.  This fortnight cannot be three weeks, because Jaime recalls seeing the marks on Rhaella the day she leaves for Dragonstone, which is after Rhaegar's death on the Trident and a crow flight; or so.  If the time between the rape and flight is more than a week, the marks would have been noticeably faded, and Jaime would not have had a reason to recall that detail. 

To sum this up, we are measuring a distance between King's Landing and the Trident, trying to march an army to and from.  GRRM says, through Jaime that it was a fortnight or less.  But we, with our stopwatches and rulers, say that is not possible.  GRRM says put your stopwatches and rulers away, and enjoy the story.  He did not say that his details of time were at fault, he is merely saying that occasionally travel time is much shorter (or longer) in Westeros than we think that it should be. 

Absolutely, and thank you. 

I absolutely agree, the idea we should fudge the timings we are told in the story and as you rightly point out the physical evidence of that time period, rather than the time it would take to get from point A to point B is laughable. And to then try to use GRRM's words about doing that for the sake of narrative to prove the latter as the more feasible is just hilarious. 

Just goes to show though, that people will make all manor of exceptions to common sense in order to disprove what they dislike.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12 July 2016 at 2:12 AM, MtnLion said:

I believe that you are underestimating the characters of Lyanna and Rhaegar, if you don't believe that they married.  Think about how Lyanna was more than capable of defending herself, and would have carried a sword if Lord Rickard had allowed it.  Think of what we know about Rhaegar loving Lyanna.  There is no reason to believe that neither would honor the other. 

I'm not sure what any of that has to do with the comment I made, and nowhere did I say I didn't believe they were married.  My point is whether the baby is legitimate or not, Lyanna is justified in feeling anxious about his safety with respect to Robert.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On July 6, 2016 at 5:33 PM, Lord Varys said:

Yeah, but again: How much has Robert's later hatred to do with young Robert_283? Why does want to kill all the Targaryens and piss on their graves?

Isn't it more likely that this hatred only festered and grew because the war was for nothing in the end and Lyanna died?

My apologies for the massive delay.

But quickly, on this point: when Ned and Robert have the convo on killing Dany in the north, when Robert says the line about the knife and the man to wield it, Ned thinks he isn't surprised. That he doesn't even bother to act surprised. That he's know for a while that Robert has a murderous rage like a madness in him re: Rhaegar's relatives. And then goes on to think of the moment he realized Robert's madness: in the throne room with the corpses of Rhaegar's children.

So, really seems like we're being told Ned thought that Robert's rage, including a rage to order the deaths of a child (the comment about the knife and the man) are NOT surprising to Ned and haven't been surprising to Ned since the scene in the throne room.

On July 6, 2016 at 5:33 PM, Lord Varys said:

What did Robert know/think about Lyanna's death? How does he think she died and who does he blame for that?

We know Ned and Robert grieved together after Lyanna's death so they must have talked about this whole thing. And Robert must have been interested how his beloved betrothed died.

A very interesting point. Bran tells Osha that "Robert fought a war to win her back." Which makes it sound like Bran's been told there was a chance to save Lyanna. But what happened after the murders of the children--how Ned eventually decided to go to Dorne with only a few friends, why Robert didn't ask him to go after Lyanna as soon as possible, etc--all of that, the books have left a HUGE blank (grumble grumble).

On July 6, 2016 at 5:33 PM, Lord Varys said:

In that sense it is actually possible that Ned inadvertently or deliberately fueled/nurtured/created Robert's lasting hatred of Rhaegar. Say, if he reinforced/confirmed Robert's view of Lyanna as Rhaegar's helpless sex slave who got abducted by him against her will and was subsequently raped all day long and imprisoned in that tower in the middle of nowhere.

Given how Ned is trying to back Robert off of hating Rhaegar's relatives and how hard he pushes back re: killing Dany, this seems. . . odd. Inadvertent? Yeah, I could see that. But intentionally stoking hatred? After what Robert did to Rhaegar's kids and how Ned reacted to that. .. I have a hard time seeing that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On July 9, 2016 at 1:05 AM, J. Stargaryen said:

I'm not arguing that Robert wasn't a threat in Ned's mind, period. I think Ned thought Robert was a potential threat, but that he could be kept in line, as Jon Arryn had obviously done. Case in point, the only reason they are having this argument is because Robert had not already ordered the murders of Dany and Viserys. So it's not just rhetoric, Ned is also being truthful. Dany and Viserys living is proof of that.

Agreed--Jon Arryn kept him in line. Because he needed to be kept in line, no? Because Ned might really be right in his assessment that Robert's desire to kill Rheagar's relatives was a madness in him. 

And Ned is thus not at all surprised that Robert is talking about ordering Dany's death. Hasn't been surprised since the moment Robert condoned the deaths of those little kids. Ned knows Robert could order deaths, too. He knows he can be talked down from it. But also seems to really believe he's capable of doing it.

On July 9, 2016 at 1:05 AM, J. Stargaryen said:

One of the main themes in Ned's story is his hope that Robert is the great man he grew up with, versus the person he suspects he's become. He hopes that Robert will ultimately redeem himself, right up until he officially orders the murder of Dany. That's when all of Ned's worst fears about Robert come true, and he gives up on him.

Amen. So, I'm guessing what we are disagreeing on is just how much Ned worries re: protecting Jon--does he worry that with enough anger, Robert might regress to the monstrous man Ned saw in the throne room over children's corpses? Or does Ned not fear that regression until he sees it?

Given that Ned is not surprised by Robert's desire to murder Dany and order her murder, I gotta side with Ned fears Robert could easily regress if his rage was strong enough. 

On July 9, 2016 at 1:05 AM, J. Stargaryen said:

Why does Ned get so uncomfortable with the idea that Robert wants to murder a seemingly innocent Targaryen child? Probably because he's harboring one. If Robert would really want to kill Viserys and Daenerys, imagine how he'd feel about (R+L=)Jon.

Agreed--but not because Jon could be "Targaryen." Because he's related to the man who stole Lyanna--who happened to be Targaryen. Robert's rage and hatred are about losing his beloved--that's the rage and hatred Ned has to work to tamp down. The thing he worries about.

On July 9, 2016 at 1:05 AM, J. Stargaryen said:

Oh, btw, this conversation takes place right after Robert inquires about Jon's mother. So it's, Who's Jon's mother? Btw, I want to kill all Targaryens! So, not only is there a literary connection for the readers, but Ned's just been reminded of Jon, and the question of his parentage, right before Robert suggests having Dany killed. And he specifically wants Dany killed because she's a Targaryen who is becoming a possible threat to him. In other words, the flow of the chapter fits a whole lot better with RLJ than with AD+L=J.

HA! A fair point.

Though I must counter, ser, with that the argument about Wylla is about Ned's honor. About Ned's paying for his past "sins" and not letting himself off the hook for his failures of honor, even though Robert insists that "no woman wants Baelor the Blessed in her bed," and that Ned should let himself off the hook. 

A discussion  that is is immediately followed by: 

Quote

The rising sun sent fingers of light through the pale white mists of dawn. A wide plain spread out beneath them, bare and brown, its flatness here and there relieved by long, low hummocks. Ned pointed them out to his king. "The barrows of the First Men." Game, Eddard II

So, a discussion of failed honor and guilt and a child, leading into the rising sun and dawn and the graves of first men. Then discussion of being on a graveyard. So, what in Ned's honor is rankling him so re: Jon? Where did he fail? And what does that have to do with a rising dawn and the ghosts of the dead and first men (not Targaryens)? Seems potentially related to the other time we see Ned be sad about the past: his words to Bran about killing the Sword of the Morning. . .  .Maybe. And Dawn. .  well, you know where my brain goes with that. But then, I can't deny, even to my self, that I have Dawn-blindness.

That's the transition into Robert's statement about the rider bringing news of Dany. So, seems like the chapter could at the very least have hints in multiple directions. 

On July 9, 2016 at 1:05 AM, J. Stargaryen said:

One of the other themes running through Ned's chapters is that he abhors the murder of children. And he's disgusted at how Robert reacts to the murder of innocents, including Lady. (A scenario which has parallels with Lyanna pleading in the ToJ, but points to RLJ, not AD+L=J.) But none of this changes the wording of the quote from Ned's eighth chapter. And since we know Robert wasn't the one who gave the order to murder Rhaegar's family, it's still a big problem for this case that is built upon Ned's thoughts.

I agree that the words in Eddard VIII have to be dealt with My point would be that since Ned is NOT surprised that Robert's hatred of Rhaegar's family, his rage and madness, would lead him to talk of sending an assassin after Dany, and since Ned knows Robert will have to be talked down from this, that he CAN"T just let it go and hope that Robert will give into his better angels--all of that really seems like Ned knows Robert could do this--is FULLY capable. He has just hoped he wouldn't, but fought hard to never have to find out whether or not Robert would.

On July 9, 2016 at 1:05 AM, J. Stargaryen said:

"[V]ery little difference" is one way of saying there is a difference. ;)

HA! Touche, ser. Though I reiterate: given Ned's reactions to both the order and the condoning, there's no practical difference in Ned's head. And since he's not surprised at Robert's talk for ordering Dany's death BECAUSE of what happened in the throne room with the murdered kids, seems like Ned's not distinguishing between ordering and condoning as dangers from Robert in Eddard II.

On July 9, 2016 at 1:05 AM, J. Stargaryen said:

And all of this fails to acknowledge the three-headed dragon in the room. That it was nothing less than a pregnant and married Daenerys Targaryen that caused Robert to issue this order. He wasn't just issuing death warrants for women and children willy-nilly. He named Dany and her unborn child, supported by Drogo's horde, as a threat to him. Most of his counselors agreed. In this conversation, and the earlier one in Ned II, her hypothetical son was named as a danger to the realm. This fits well with RLJ, since Jon is a male Targaryen, whereas there's no connection to AD+L=J.

True--but Ned never buys the argument in Eddard II. Robert talks all he wants re: protecting his realm, Ned always thinks it's really about Robert's hatred of the man who stole his love.

And Ned doesn't seem to buy that political expediency is the real cause later, either, no matter how much the others protest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Vaedys Targaryen said:

someone who asked GRRM how much older than Dany Jon was, which he replied "approximately 9 months", but not "Dany was born 9 months after the sack."

Yes, GRRM did say that Daenerys was 8-9 months younger than Jon.  We know that Jon was born at very near the sack.  But, Daenerys relays to the reader that she was born nine moons after her mother fled to Dragonstone. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, maudisdottir said:

I'm not sure what any of that has to do with the comment I made, and nowhere did I say I didn't believe they were married.  My point is whether the baby is legitimate or not, Lyanna is justified in feeling anxious about his safety with respect to Robert.

Certainly, if Rhaegar and Lyanna married, then Jon is legitimate.  (period)  Or, am I missing something?  :D

As far as anxiety for Robert's reaction, if the child is not a Targaryen, he is not going to see Dragon-spawn when he looks in that direction.  A legitimate male Targaryen is what Robert dreads most of all, or maybe we are reading different stories?  Why would Robert forgo assassinating Daenerys until she married, and became pregnant.  That was not even going to be a Targaryen child, but a legitimate child of a Targaryen was worrisome to Robert.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/11/2016 at 9:25 AM, Ser Kinslayer said:

Do we know exactly how much time occurred between the battle on the Trident, the incidents in KL, and Ned reaching the ToJ?

No.  That has been debated a lot.  If you think about it logically, the time between the Trident and Ned reaching the toj would probably be several months.  This is because you have:

1.  Battle of the Trident.  Robert is wounded badly enough that he has to send Ned ahead, on horseback, to King's Landing, while Robert recovers.

2.  Message gets to King's Landing stating that Rhaegar is dead.  This could take a day or two if the message goes by raven.  

3.  After the message gets to King's Landing (same day? a few days later?) Aerys burns Chested.

4.  Two weeks after Chelsted burns, Ned and the cavalry arrive and the city is sacked.  No indication whether the Sack lasts a day or a week.

5.  After the Sack is over and Robert has recovered sufficiently to travel, Robert and the infantry arrive.  Robert has a coronation.

6.  After that, Tywin presents the dead children.  Ned leaves King's Landing that day.

7.  After leaving King's Landing but before getting to the toj, Ned fights multiple unspecified battles.  (From AGOT: "Eddard Stark had ridden forth that very day in a cold rage, to fight the last battles of the war alone in the south.").  

 We don't know whether one of those battles was Ned vs. Mace at Storm's End or if Mace surrendered without a fight.  But either way, Ned had to go to Storm's End to lift the siege.

8.  Ned lifts the siege of Storm's End.

9.  Ned fights whatever other battles make up "the last battles of the war . . . in the south."

10.  Ned and his companions then travel to the toj and fight the 3 KGs.  

So, we don't have a precise timeline for all of this, but the way GRRM has written it, it sounds like a period of several months.  

You can also tie this into the timing of Ned's marriage to Cat.  Ned and Cat married after the Battle of the Bells and then he left her for approximately a year to go fight "in the south."  There is no indication of any battle taking place between Ned's marriage and the Trident.  Rather, it appears that the Battle of the Bells (and therefore Ned's marriage) was shortly before the Trident because Jaime tells us that Rhaegar returned to KL from the south at the same time as (1) Prince Lewyn went to collect the Dornish troops who were marching up the Boneway to meet Rhaegar at the Trident, and (2) Barristan Selmy and Jonathor Darry were gathering up the loyalist troops who had been scattered by the Stark/Tully/Arryn forces at the Battle of the Bells.  So the Trident may very well have happened within a few weeks of Ned's marriage and he then spent a year away from Catelyn warring in the South, finding Lyanna at the toj close to the end of that year (anywhere from 6-11 months after the Battle of the Trident).

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, MtnLion said:

Yes, GRRM did say that Daenerys was 8-9 months younger than Jon.  We know that Jon was born at very near the sack.  But, Daenerys relays to the reader that she was born nine moons after her mother fled to Dragonstone. 

Here is the SSM:

http://www.westeros.org/Citadel/SSM/Entry/1040

This was something GRRM was thinking of doing when he was writing Storm of Swords, but he scrapped the idea.  Look closely at the question -- the questioner wants GRRM to say it is unrealistic for Ashara Dayne to be Jon's mother because the timing doesn't work.  GRRM says that to the contrary, the timeline makes it very possible for Ashara to be the mother.  He hints that, in Storm of Swords, he plans to reveal that Ashara was a lady in waiting to Elia in KL, that Ned and Ashara met up around 9 months before Jon was born, and that the meeting didn't happen at Starfall.  The implication is that he plans to reveal that the Ned/Ashara meeting took place 8 or 9 months before the Sack of King's Landing, which would place Jon's birth around the time of the Sack.  But then he obviously changed his mind, because none of that was included in Storm of Swords and some of it was contradicted by the World Book (SSM says Elia lived in KL while the World Book says she lived on Dragonstone).  So I don't think this SSM tells us anything about the timing of Jon's birth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, The Twinslayer said:

Here is the SSM:

http://www.westeros.org/Citadel/SSM/Entry/1040

This was something GRRM was thinking of doing when he was writing Storm of Swords, but he scrapped the idea.  Look closely at the question -- the questioner wants GRRM to say it is unrealistic for Ashara Dayne to be Jon's mother because the timing doesn't work.  GRRM says that to the contrary, the timeline makes it very possible for Ashara to be the mother.  He hints that, in Storm of Swords, he plans to reveal that Ashara was a lady in waiting to Elia in KL, that Ned and Ashara met up around 9 months before Jon was born, and that the meeting didn't happen at Starfall.  The implication is that he plans to reveal that the Ned/Ashara meeting took place 8 or 9 months before the Sack of King's Landing, which would place Jon's birth around the time of the Sack.  But then he obviously changed his mind, because none of that was included in Storm of Swords and some of it was contradicted by the World Book (SSM says Elia lived in KL while the World Book says she lived on Dragonstone).  So I don't think this SSM tells us anything about the timing of Jon's birth.

SSMs basically tell us nothing as long as we can know for a certainty that George consulted his notes. We guys don't write the books but if people ask us questions about the known stuff in this series we make mistakes when talking from memory, too.

We can safely assume that the Sack didn't last that long considering that it is unlikely that Ned would have allowed Tywin to continue to butcher innocent civilians. On the other hand, it is evident that Tywin executed quasi-royal authority at one point when he had Ser Jaremy Rykker and Ser Alliser Thorne choose between death and the Wall. Robert surely would have pardoned them, wouldn't he?

7 hours ago, Sly Wren said:

My apologies for the massive delay.

No problem, I don't keep lists on people who stop continuing a conversation. That's what little birds are for...

7 hours ago, Sly Wren said:

But quickly, on this point: when Ned and Robert have the convo on killing Dany in the north, when Robert says the line about the knife and the man to wield it, Ned thinks he isn't surprised. That he doesn't even bother to act surprised. That he's know for a while that Robert has a murderous rage like a madness in him re: Rhaegar's relatives. And then goes on to think of the moment he realized Robert's madness: in the throne room with the corpses of Rhaegar's children.

Well, sure he isn't surprised. He is not stupid. He has just read a letter informing him that Viserys III had married his sister Daenerys to Khal Drogo, forging political alliance with the Dothraki. You don't have to be very smart to realize what Robert is up to there.

My issue just is: Could Ned already be certain that Robert's hatred of the Targaryens would last back in the day and that did he actually truly believe that he would want to kill Lyanna's child at this point? When Lyanna herself was still alive. This still doesn't mean that Ned/Lyanna could/would not have been afraid of Robert in all that. But I simply have trouble imagining that Ned ever believed Robert would kill his nephew.

I just don't think so. Later on Ned might very well have realized that this 'madness' lingered and festered over the years. After all, Robert essentially admits that himself.

7 hours ago, Sly Wren said:

So, really seems like we're being told Ned thought that Robert's rage, including a rage to order the deaths of a child (the comment about the knife and the man) are NOT surprising to Ned and haven't been surprising to Ned since the scene in the throne room.

Daenerys Targaryen isn't exactly a child like any other. She is the enemy, especially as the glue tying the Dothraki to Viserys III.

7 hours ago, Sly Wren said:

A very interesting point. Bran tells Osha that "Robert fought a war to win her back." Which makes it sound like Bran's been told there was a chance to save Lyanna. But what happened after the murders of the children--how Ned eventually decided to go to Dorne with only a few friends, why Robert didn't ask him to go after Lyanna as soon as possible, etc--all of that, the books have left a HUGE blank (grumble grumble).

Well, above I raised the fact that Robert said Lyanna's name when he slept with Cersei. That was months after her death and suggests in my opinion a genuine devotion to Lyanna that extended far beyond whatever Robert learned about Lyanna in the wake of the war (he must have learned something).

The idea that Robert wouldn't have wanted to marry a living Lyanna is rather unlikely in light of that, as is, I think, the idea that Robert would have wanted to marry over the dead body of her child by Rhaegar. But if it was widely known that Rhaegar and Lyanna had married the situation would have been very complicated. 

7 hours ago, Sly Wren said:

Given how Ned is trying to back Robert off of hating Rhaegar's relatives and how hard he pushes back re: killing Dany, this seems. . . odd. Inadvertent? Yeah, I could see that. But intentionally stoking hatred? After what Robert did to Rhaegar's kids and how Ned reacted to that. .. I have a hard time seeing that.

Oh, I meant that Ned might have deliberately decided to reinforce Robert's own rape narrative (in spite the marriage) to better obscure Jon's true parentage. If Robert never believes Lyanna loved Rhaegar then Jon Snow might be safer in the long run. But Ned certainly wouldn't have wanted to fuel Robert's Targaryen hatred deliberately. That would just have been the effect of that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎10‎/‎07‎/‎2016 at 10:45 PM, Lord Varys said:

I have great difficulties imagining that Robert would have wanted to see the son of such a woman dead. Rhaegar's trueborn son, a claimant to the Iron Throne most certainly, but not an innocent who was not possibly a threat to him.

 

On ‎13‎/‎07‎/‎2016 at 3:05 AM, RumHam said:

There are a surprising number of people out there who refuse to believe the world is round even though it's been proven through math and like, people circumnavigating it and going into space and seeing it. 

So yeah, I'm not shocked. 

Also everyone knows Jon's true father is the chemtrails. 

 

On ‎13‎/‎07‎/‎2016 at 7:42 AM, maudisdottir said:

I'm not sure what any of that has to do with the comment I made, and nowhere did I say I didn't believe they were married.  My point is whether the baby is legitimate or not, Lyanna is justified in feeling anxious about his safety with respect to Robert.

 

The question of legitimacy is important but not vital and it is difficult to answer too.

The Targaryen males could marry more than one lady. However only the King had that right. If that Targaryen was not the King he needed the King consent to marry another lady.

So there are 3 possibilities:

1st - They had Aerys leave to marry officially with a written document allowing his son to marry again. They with or without a Septon married before a weirwood tree.

If proven, he is John Targaryen. No question about it.

2nd – They had Aerys consent to marry without any official document. They married with or without a Septon before a weirwood tree.

He is John Targaryen but prove will be demanded. Howard Reed testimony, Prince Rhaegar’s Harp inside Lysanna Stark’s tomb (she does not have a sword/spirit so it`s not a sacrilege) and others. Some may say legally he is not. Some will always argue.

3rd – They did not have Aerys consent but Lyanna went with the prince willingly and with or without a Septon married before a weirwood tree.

For the majority he will not be John Targaryen saying that no Targaryen ever married two women without the King`s consent. And, by the same, it is true. Other will say that the King was mad and his consent was not needed. His legitimacy will be in question

If I were John I would officially in his letters sign the name John Dragon the King in the North.

If I were him I, to attract lords. Knights and peasants alike from all Westeros to aid him against the Night King, would even be bolder; I would sign as John Dragon, son of Lysanna Stark and Rhaegar Targaryen, son of Ice and Fire, heir to all Westeros. This would work magic by itself and make people think twice about the “crazy” claim the Others returned instead of just saying he is nuts or is using it to confirm his kingdom in the north.

4th – Rhaegar did kidnapped Lysana.

Nothing needs to be spoken here. He is an adulterous bastard born from rape.

 

As you can see there are lots of things that can be spoken about the matter. At the end I believe it will fall to Daenerys to decide about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Sly Wren said:

snip

I guess I'm just not sure why you think Ned's thoughts about Robert hating Targaryens is an argument in favor of Ned believing Robert would have murdered Arthur Dayne's son.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

No problem, I don't keep lists on people who stop continuing a conversation. That's what little birds are for...

:cheers:

21 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Well, sure he isn't surprised. He is not stupid. He has just read a letter informing him that Viserys III had married his sister Daenerys to Khal Drogo, forging political alliance with the Dothraki. You don't have to be very smart to realize what Robert is up to there.

My issue just is: Could Ned already be certain that Robert's hatred of the Targaryens would last back in the day and that did he actually truly believe that he would want to kill Lyanna's child at this point? When Lyanna herself was still alive. This still doesn't mean that Ned/Lyanna could/would not have been afraid of Robert in all that. But I simply have trouble imagining that Ned ever believed Robert would kill his nephew.

I just don't think so. Later on Ned might very well have realized that this 'madness' lingered and festered over the years. After all, Robert essentially admits that himself.

But Ned's lack of surprise isn't  about the political intent to assassinate Dany. 

He's specifically not surprised about the rage--really seems like he knows it's been there since the moment tin the throne room: 

Quote

Ned did not feign surprise; Robert's hatred of the Targaryens was a madness in him. He remembered the angry words they had exchanged when Tywin Lannister had presented Robert with the corpses of Rhaegar's wife and children as a token of fealty. Ned had named that murder; Robert called it war. When he had protested that the young prince and princess were no more than babes, his new-made king had replied, "I see no babes. Only dragonspawn." Not even Jon Arryn had been able to calm that storm. Eddard Stark had ridden out that very day in a cold rage, to fight the last battles of the war alone in the south. It had taken another death to reconcile them; Lyanna's death, and the grief they had shared over her passing. Game, Eddard II

Which makes it sound like Ned has known all along that Robert's rage was a big problem. Otherwise, seems like it would be, "Ned was surprised that Robert's rage was still with him," no?

21 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Daenerys Targaryen isn't exactly a child like any other. She is the enemy, especially as the glue tying the Dothraki to Viserys III.

Agreed. But once Robert starts talking about the politics of killing Dany, Ned calms down. It's when Robert's talking about killing everyone connected to Rhaegar and pissing on their graves that makes Ned tense and angry and worried. Once Robert's talking about practical stuff, Ned gets confident that he can talk Robert down. Once th madness has passed.

So, with Dany, Ned seems to fear Robert's rage about her relation to the man who "stole" Lyanna more than her potential claim to the throne. 

21 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Well, above I raised the fact that Robert said Lyanna's name when he slept with Cersei. That was months after her death and suggests in my opinion a genuine devotion to Lyanna that extended far beyond whatever Robert learned about Lyanna in the wake of the war (he must have learned something).

The idea that Robert wouldn't have wanted to marry a living Lyanna is rather unlikely in light of that, as is, I think, the idea that Robert would have wanted to marry over the dead body of her child by Rhaegar. But if it was widely known that Rhaegar and Lyanna had married the situation would have been very complicated. 

I agree--that could make it more complicated.

But, if Lyanna had just fallen in love with a man and had a child by him--that could also drive Robert into a rage of betrayal--because he so idealized Lyanna, no? Heaven help the woman who falls off of her pedestal in a highly patriarchal society.

21 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Oh, I meant that Ned might have deliberately decided to reinforce Robert's own rape narrative (in spite the marriage) to better obscure Jon's true parentage.

Maybe--but Ned's best defense and his reflexive position seems to be silence. I could see him just saying as little as possible vs. trying to reinforce things.

21 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

If Robert never believes Lyanna loved Rhaegar then Jon Snow might be safer in the long run.

Perhaps--but I think her failing his idealization of her could be very dangerous, too.

21 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

But Ned certainly wouldn't have wanted to fuel Robert's Targaryen hatred deliberately. That would just have been the effect of that.

Agreed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, J. Stargaryen said:

I guess I'm just not sure why you think Ned's thoughts about Robert hating Targaryens is an argument in favor of Ned believing Robert would have murdered Arthur Dayne's son.

Because Ned believes Robert hates Targaryens because they are related to the man who stole Robert's beloved.

The root of Robert's hatred is not "Targaryens." It's his love/obsession with Lyanna.

If another man stole Robert's beloved instead, wouldn't the same apply? Hatred of all related to that man? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Sly Wren said:

Because Ned believes Robert hates Targaryens because they are related to the man who stole Robert's beloved.

The root of Robert's hatred is not "Targaryens." It's his love/obsession with Lyanna.

If another man stole Robert's beloved instead, wouldn't the same apply? Hatred of all related to that man? 

So Robert would just cut+paste his hatred from Rhaegar and the Targaryens to Arthur and the Daynes? I have my doubts. Robert didn't fight a war with the Daynes. The Lord Dayne didn't murder his would be brother- and father-in-law, not to mention friends and allies. Nor did the Lord Dayne call for his head, as well as Ned's. Nor was it the Lord Dayne who sent Robert's parents on their ill-fated mission to find Rhaegar a suitable bride. Nor was there any possibility that Robert was part of an anti-Dayne alliance (southron ambitions).

So, while I think Robert's hatred was largely fueled by losing Lyanna, I think he had plenty of other good, legitimate reasons to hate the Targaryens as a whole. Especially once he began fighting a war against them. And I think the timing of any hypothetical revelation of X+L=J to Robert has to be considered. That is, it would have been after the rebellion ended.

Of course we can't rule out that Ned and Lyanna were being extra careful, if AD+L=J. But, based on the story GRRM is painting, I have a hard time imagining Robert's fury being directed at the Daynes the way it is at the Targaryens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Sly Wren said:

But Ned's lack of surprise isn't  about the political intent to assassinate Dany. 

He's specifically not surprised about the rage--really seems like he knows it's been there since the moment tin the throne room: 

Which makes it sound like Ned has known all along that Robert's rage was a big problem. Otherwise, seems like it would be, "Ned was surprised that Robert's rage was still with him," no?

 

Could be. The Rhaegar issue clearly is at the heart of all that but this is a personal thing. Would Robert truly have butchered a young Daenerys and shaking Viserys had they been dragged in front of him by some thugs? I'm not so sure. Killing a scheming enemy is quite different from killing an innocent child.

I still read Ned's memories as a sign that he first recognized what he would later call 'Robert's madness' in thought after the Sack. And the presence of that would be easily recognizable in every conversation Ned and Robert had since then about the war over the years (or even back in Winterfell).

27 minutes ago, Sly Wren said:

Agreed. But once Robert starts talking about the politics of killing Dany, Ned calms down. It's when Robert's talking about killing everyone connected to Rhaegar and pissing on their graves that makes Ned tense and angry and worried. Once Robert's talking about practical stuff, Ned gets confident that he can talk Robert down. Once th madness has passed.

Yeah, but the madness is connected mostly to Rhaegar. The Targaryens stand for Rhaegar in this rage. Lyanna's son would be Lyanna's child, too, and actually very much look like her and Ned. Would Robert kill a child that looks like Ned?

27 minutes ago, Sly Wren said:

So, with Dany, Ned seems to fear Robert's rage about her relation to the man who "stole" Lyanna more than her potential claim to the throne. 

Ned wants things to be less complicated. He doesn't want to endanger Jon's life by revealing his heritage that much is evident. Think about it: If Jon was just some bastard child then only Robert's injured pride could be the motivation to condone the murder of that child (nobody would push him to do it). But there would be a much more stronger incentive to not push that issue because Eddard Stark isn't some nobody. He can rebel against King Robert as easily as he rebelled against King Aerys. And with his marriage alliance and connections he could easily enough cast down the very king he had made. Especially if he declared for King Viserys III and got Doran Martell and some Reach lords in his alliance as well.

Robert would have to think all that through before considering to murder Lyanna's child.

27 minutes ago, Sly Wren said:

I agree--that could make it more complicated.

But, if Lyanna had just fallen in love with a man and had a child by him--that could also drive Robert into a rage of betrayal--because he so idealized Lyanna, no? Heaven help the woman who falls off of her pedestal in a highly patriarchal society.

See above. And Lyanna was still only his betrothed. Lyanna's lord and legal guardian until such time as she married was Rickard Stark and after his death Eddard Stark, her elder brother. Robert Baratheon had a right to be angry but he had no right to chastise Lyanna with his own hands or punish her in any way. That would have been Ned's duty. And it is very much reflected by the fact that Ned took her all the way back to Winterfell and put her remains in the crypts. A married woman would usually be put to rest beside her husband.

27 minutes ago, Sly Wren said:

Maybe--but Ned's best defense and his reflexive position seems to be silence. I could see him just saying as little as possible vs. trying to reinforce things.

He must have told Robert something about Lyanna's death. It is not realistic to assume that a man who loved Lyanna as madly as Robert wouldn't have wanted to know what happened to her and how/when she died.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On July 14, 2016 at 2:47 PM, J. Stargaryen said:

So Robert would just cut+paste his hatred from Rhaegar and the Targaryens to Arthur and the Daynes? I have my doubts. Robert didn't fight a war with the Daynes. The Lord Dayne didn't murder his would be brother- and father-in-law, not to mention friends and allies. Nor did the Lord Dayne call for his head, as well as Ned's. Nor was it the Lord Dayne who sent Robert's parents on their ill-fated mission to find Rhaegar a suitable bride. Nor was there any possibility that Robert was part of an anti-Dayne alliance (southron ambitions).

So, while I think Robert's hatred was largely fueled by losing Lyanna, I think he had plenty of other good, legitimate reasons to hate the Targaryens as a whole. Especially once he began fighting a war against them. And I think the timing of any hypothetical revelation of X+L=J to Robert has to be considered. That is, it would have been after the rebellion ended.

On the bolded--I completely agree. And we don't have enough info on the Daynes' role to know if they might have cause to worry Robert would see them as perpetrators. And Robert did have plenty of reasons built up to hate Targs.

But that all started with Lyanna. And he keeps bringing her up. She's the core reason. And Ned fears that mad hatred.

On July 14, 2016 at 2:47 PM, J. Stargaryen said:

Of course we can't rule out that Ned and Lyanna were being extra careful, if AD+L=J.

Yup. A definite possibility. Fear's a powerful thing--especially over a child's. I could see them refusing to take the chance. Or Lyanna's refusing to take the chance and thus relieved when Ned agrees to keep Jon.

On July 14, 2016 at 2:47 PM, J. Stargaryen said:

But, based on the story GRRM is painting, I have a hard time imagining Robert's fury being directed at the Daynes the way it is at the Targaryens.

I agree that there's a good chance Robert would not done what Ned feared he'd do. Robert seems to run hot and fast--though his anger over Lyanna has been long burning. I can see him relenting, as he did with Dany.

But I can still see Ned fearing what Robert could do in his fury--that Robert might regret it later, but could very well still hit hard in fury.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On July 14, 2016 at 3:16 PM, Lord Varys said:

Could be. The Rhaegar issue clearly is at the heart of all that but this is a personal thing. Would Robert truly have butchered a young Daenerys and shaking Viserys had they been dragged in front of him by some thugs? I'm not so sure. Killing a scheming enemy is quite different from killing an innocent child.

Agreed--but he could call for their blood in his fury and let others do the work away from him. And then refuse to be sorry afterwards, as he is about the Targ kids.

On July 14, 2016 at 3:16 PM, Lord Varys said:

I still read Ned's memories as a sign that he first recognized what he would later call 'Robert's madness' in thought after the Sack. And the presence of that would be easily recognizable in every conversation Ned and Robert had since then about the war over the years (or even back in Winterfell).

All fair. Just really seems like he's known since the moment in the throne room that Robert is capable of monstrosity.

On July 14, 2016 at 3:16 PM, Lord Varys said:

Yeah, but the madness is connected mostly to Rhaegar. The Targaryens stand for Rhaegar in this rage. Lyanna's son would be Lyanna's child, too, and actually very much look like her and Ned. Would Robert kill a child that looks like Ned?

 On the bolded--exactly. He hates because of the man who took Lyanna from him. And thus will hate even completely innocent children who are connected to him. 

Would Robert actually kill Lyanna's child after seeing the child and hearing Ned's appeal? Not sure. But one way or another, Ned and Lyanna seem to have insisted on not finding out. 

On July 14, 2016 at 3:16 PM, Lord Varys said:

Ned wants things to be less complicated. He doesn't want to endanger Jon's life by revealing his heritage that much is evident. Think about it: If Jon was just some bastard child then only Robert's injured pride could be the motivation to condone the murder of that child (nobody would push him to do it). But there would be a much more stronger incentive to not push that issue because Eddard Stark isn't some nobody. He can rebel against King Robert as easily as he rebelled against King Aerys. And with his marriage alliance and connections he could easily enough cast down the very king he had made. Especially if he declared for King Viserys III and got Doran Martell and some Reach lords in his alliance as well.

Robert would have to think all that through before considering to murder Lyanna's child.

But much of that also applies to the offense against the Martells too, no? That condoning the murders of Elia and her children would anger an entire region of Westeros. But he does it, even with Ned in his face calling him on the horror. Does it even with Ned storming off in a cold rage and only reconciling after at least months of anger and rage. And still, Robert never gives up this position that killing those kids was fine. 

So, Robert should have thought about all sorts of things re: those dead children. But he refused to--just called them all dragonspawn. Anger and rage. And Ned finds it all too horrifying to bear. Given those reactions, I could easily see him and Lyanna saying that Robert couldn't be trusted with the child of a man who "took" Lyanna from Robert. 

On July 14, 2016 at 3:16 PM, Lord Varys said:

See above. And Lyanna was still only his betrothed.

He still adored and wanted her. Loved her even more than Ned did. Just because the law and social customs might say that Robert  shouldn't be this angry doesn't mean he wasn't or that Ned wasn't fully aware of what Robert could do in his anger--he'd seen it in the form of his accepting two bloody children. 

On July 14, 2016 at 3:16 PM, Lord Varys said:

He must have told Robert something about Lyanna's death. It is not realistic to assume that a man who loved Lyanna as madly as Robert wouldn't have wanted to know what happened to her and how/when she died.

Agreed. I can just seem him keeping details to a minimum.

Share this post


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

×