Will the tombs reveal Jons parentage? [Spoilers]

[Mr. Greenhands]

On 6/20/2016 at 2:47 AM, Attitude said:

So after seeing episode 9, it's very likely Jon will descend into the tombs of winterfell.

I actually remember some people theorizing about the cripts in relation with R+L=J (it was on the book forum and reddit), so I decided to google it. 

What I stubbled on was the following (show) theory (Possible spoilers inside!):
https://www.reddit.com/r/asoiaf/comments/4k261b/spoilers_everything_the_forbidden_tomb_in_the/

For me this sounds like a realistic possibility for Jon to get to know his parentage, but somehow they will have to mix the ToJ scenes in it (we didn't see those scenes in the beginning of the season for nothing). 

So I could see the following happen:
Jon is in the crypts, and he somehow decides to go deeper inside the crypts. Once he sees the rubble he starts digging, end of scene.

ToJ scene with Ned & Lyanna. We learn that the baby isn't Neds son, but Lyanna's. At the point that Lyanna is about to reveal who Jons father is (maybe after she reveals, so the viewers know it before Jon himself), we cut back to Jon in the crypts and he sees the shown gravestone.

End of episode 10. 

What do you think? 

LF could tell Sansa the truth about Jon.  There is a reason why he was in the crypts with her last season, and why he alluded to the fact that he probably knows more than he is telling.
 

 

[Masha]

4 minutes ago, Mr. Greenhands said:

 

Disagree on tomb 100%

Nothing in tomb.

Basic TOJ, Ned meets Lyanna, Lyanna unaudibly whispers something, see baby. One baby boy (Twins aren't happening same as Lady Stoneheart).  End scene - cut to adult Jon. No explanation, no Father's name and no nods on his legitimacy or Targ blood.

[Lord Friendzone]

13 minutes ago, Masha said:

Disagree on tomb 100%

Nothing in tomb.

Basic TOJ, Ned meets Lyanna, Lyanna unaudibly whispers something, see baby. One baby boy (Twins aren't happening same as Lady Stoneheart).  End scene - cut to adult Jon. No explanation, no Father's name and no nods on his legitimacy or Targ blood.

Either they're trolling or just waiting for George.

[Masha]

12 minutes ago, Lord Friendzone said:

Either they're trolling or just waiting for George.

Probably both. I mean they probably enjoyed the whole crazy about Jon being dead that was going on between the season and keeping GOT in the news, so they probably attempting to recreate it to a smaller degree.

Plus, I also think whatever their faults in writing, they greatly respect George, and they would definitely like to give George another chance to finish up next book where the whole scene is probably revealed and explained before next season, so that scene is made proper. 

They changed a lot of things, but this is probably one of the major ones that George would probably love to reveal/write first. And he would have a chance to do it, he just has to release the book before April 2017.

[ivosan]

IMHO we won't even see the Rickon's burial scene, so this theory will fade away

[Thobias Tavares]

IMO, Bran or Howland Reed would be the ones that could reveal the secret to Jon... Don't see how could LF have known this.

[Dizzy Walker]

When it is convenient to the story line , Meera is going to tell Bran or Jon  "oh by the way, my father told me something about how you guys are cousins, but it is supposed to be this big secret, there is this thing hidden in _______ that proves it"

There is something about the crypts, I really believe, but think it will only be in the books. Between there must always be a Stark in Winterfell and Lady Dustin going to the crypt  drives me crazy sometimes trying to figure it out.

In the show, if there is some kind of evidence about a marriage,  I would love it to be somewhere in the Winterfell weirwood.  Ned spent all that time that there, not just to be to close to his gods, but to remind him of his promise, and to make sure it had not been found. Just a wish..

Sansa didn't have a problem being married twice. Being married to only one person seems to be more of a guide line for the nobles, it is not unheard of by any means...

Littlefinger, being a clever man, might have had an idea about Jon, and spent some time finding information about him. He might have come across a Dayne servant in one of his whore houses that knew something. Littlefinger worked his way up in the system, and owned brothels where he sneaked peaks and overheard conversations. Who knows who he came across or overheard.  

[Sansa's Hairnet]

11 hours ago, Drago said:

The tomb theory is a good one. It could explain why there is a Tomb there for Lyanna in the first place. It has been explained that only the Lords get a place there from what I Remember.

No, there are tombs in the crypts for all of the Starks, including Ned's children. There's no specific mention of whether there is a tomb for Jon. (In one of Arya's early chapters, she talks about Robb taking her, Sansa and a very young Bran down to the crypts to see their tombs... a white spirit appeared and began moaning for blood. Sansa screams and runs, Bran grabs Robb's legs and begins crying, and Arya punches the spirit -- which turns out to be Jon covered with flour, playing a joke on them.) However, there are only stone effigies of the Starks who were either Kings of Winter or Lords of Winterfell. That's what is unusual about Lyanna's tomb... Ned had an effigy made for her too. She is the only one with an effigy who was neither a king or a lord, so it seems plausible the statue is a clue that there is something else special about that particular tomb.

I've been re-reading and paying particular attention to mentions of the crypts because I have a pet theory about them too, but my idea centers on those old Kings of Winter with their stone direwolves at their feet and iron swords across their laps. There are so many mentions of them... Ned dreams about them, Jon dreams about them, and in one of Jon's dreams they even come to life. And that is what I'm thinking is going to happen eventually when the Wall falls and the Others march on Winterfell -- those old kings and lords are going to rise too and join the battle.

If you think about it, it's a bit odd that those crypts even exist. Have we heard about any other castle or keep with a crypt beneath it? If I'm remembering right, the Targs burn their dead, the Tullys and the Iron Born "bury" them in the river or sea... have we heard of any other House that keeps their dead downstairs in the basement? So I think all of those dead Starks are down there for a reason -- that reason being that they are going to come back at some point.

[tugela]

12 hours ago, Drago said:

The tomb theory is a good one. It could explain why there is a Tomb there for Lyanna in the first place. It has been explained that only the Lords get a place there from what I Remember. What better place to hide anything which would could confirm Jon's parents than to hide it in plain sight away from Robert Baratheon and the rest of the Vultures. Really only the Starks goes down with the odd Visitor so it makes sense.

There would need to be a marriage Cloak, a decree from Rhaegar himself stating that he indeed Married her, some possession of his like the Harp or maybe as some others have posited that Rhaegar may have found Dark Sister, one of the ancestral swords. It would also make sense if he left a decree, one for a boy and one for a girl depending on the sex of the baby when born to cover any event.

We know Rhaegar wasn't there for the birth so he must of prepared some document to protect his Child, I would expect nothing less of a Prince to do so.

All of the family was buried there, but only the kings and lords got statues.

There won't be any Rhaegar stuff there.

The recurring message we get from dreams/visions/thoughts is that Jon does not belong there. It does not mean that there is a secret tomb no one can find for him, rather it is symbolic that he is not who he thinks he is, that he is not a Stark (hence does not belong there with the other Starks). Being Lyanna's son from a man of another house would satisfy that criteria.

I doubt that there is anything actually down there that would constitute proof of his parentage.

[tugela]

3 hours ago, Masha said:

Disagree on tomb 100%

Nothing in tomb.

Basic TOJ, Ned meets Lyanna, Lyanna unaudibly whispers something, see baby. One baby boy (Twins aren't happening same as Lady Stoneheart).  End scene - cut to adult Jon. No explanation, no Father's name and no nods on his legitimacy or Targ blood.

Meera will turn out to be Jon's twin.

[tugela]

33 minutes ago, Sansa's Hairnet said:

No, there are tombs in the crypts for all of the Starks, including Ned's children. There's no specific mention of whether there is a tomb for Jon. (In one of Arya's early chapters, she talks about Robb taking her, Sansa and a very young Bran down to the crypts to see their tombs... a white spirit appeared and began moaning for blood. Sansa screams and runs, Bran grabs Robb's legs and begins crying, and Arya punches the spirit -- which turns out to be Jon covered with flour, playing a joke on them.) However, there are only stone effigies of the Starks who were either Kings of Winter or Lords of Winterfell. That's what is unusual about Lyanna's tomb... Ned had an effigy made for her too. She is the only one with an effigy who was neither a king or a lord, so it seems plausible the statue is a clue that there is something else special about that particular tomb.

I've been re-reading and paying particular attention to mentions of the crypts because I have a pet theory about them too, but my idea centers on those old Kings of Winter with their stone direwolves at their feet and iron swords across their laps. There are so many mentions of them... Ned dreams about them, Jon dreams about them, and in one of Jon's dreams they even come to life. And that is what I'm thinking is going to happen eventually when the Wall falls and the Others march on Winterfell -- those old kings and lords are going to rise too and join the battle.

If you think about it, it's a bit odd that those crypts even exist. Have we heard about any other castle or keep with a crypt beneath it? If I'm remembering right, the Targs burn their dead, the Tullys and the Iron Born "bury" them in the river or sea... have we heard of any other House that keeps their dead downstairs in the basement? So I think all of those dead Starks are down there for a reason -- that reason being that they are going to come back at some point.

The only way Lyanna would be entitled to a statue would be if she were a queen. One might argue that Rhaegar would be king once Aerys was dead, and he could marry again once Elia was dead. If Rhaegar was not at the Trident, and the person killed there was glamoured with ruby magic, and really someone else, then it is possible that Rhaegar was still alive and able to legitimately marry Lyanna. That would make Jon a trueborn Targaryen, and heir to the throne. It would also make Lyanna a queen, and consequently worthy of having a statue.

That would play nicely into my theory that the Night King is actually Rhaegar corrupted by the children.

There may be an inscription hidden somewhere on her statue explaining why it was there. That would be a reasonable mechanism for Jon to discover his heritage.

[Chib]

46 minutes ago, tugela said:

Meera will turn out to be Jon's twin.

Based on the leaks, no.

[Pile-O-Starks]

3 minutes ago, Chib said:

Based on the leaks, no.

Not cool at all. Some people actively avoid leaks.

[Lucius Lovejoy]

1 hour ago, Sansa's Hairnet said:

I've been re-reading and paying particular attention to mentions of the crypts because I have a pet theory about them too, but my idea centers on those old Kings of Winter with their stone direwolves at their feet and iron swords across their laps. There are so many mentions of them... Ned dreams about them, Jon dreams about them, and in one of Jon's dreams they even come to life. And that is what I'm thinking is going to happen eventually when the Wall falls and the Others march on Winterfell -- those old kings and lords are going to rise too and join the battle.

Thanks for the interesting theory!  I'm not a book reader so I only get insight like this from this forum.  I like that idea a lot, much more than other crackpot theories about why "there must always be a Stark in Winterfell,"

As for Jon finding out his parentage in the tombs, I don't see any plausible way that happens.  Personally, I'm rooting against R+L=J, in fact I'd prefer if Jon's parentage was perpetually kept a secret, at least to him and everyone else in the world (maybe the reader/viewer knows, or at least knows his mother).  I see the bittersweet ending GRRM supposedly promised being about Jon's death or some other sacrifice he makes to bring peace with the WW.  After he is gone, he is eulogized (perhaps by Dany) with the imagery of ice and fire, but not necessarily meaning Targaryen and Stark.  Fire could be him reborn by R'hollor, him having a fiery sword, him riding a dragon, etc.  Ice because maybe he becomes Coldhands Jon at some point late in the battle when it looks the bleakest, or because we was a Northerner, or whatever.

[Pile-O-Starks]

Having Jon's parentage revealed through the tombs would be awesome, but it better happen in a way that nobody has proposed here.

Having a tombstone carved and waiting, even if hidden, is lame as hell and very un-Ned-like. That doesn't mean the show won't do it, but it would be very surprising if something like this was done in the books. Any sort of marriage cloak / Rhaegar harp / whatever artifact would just raise questions but answer none of them. It might make Jon want to figure it out, but it would prove nothing. Also, where would it be hidden that nobody had found it all these years? And why the hell would Jon find it, suddenly? The Stark kids (and Theon) were just allowed to play down there. If there was some secret, you would think Ned would have forbidden them from going down there.

Anything with Lyanna's tomb being magic or containing some sort of hidden message would mean that somebody had built it that way, meaning that somebody would know the secret. A risk Ned would not take. Again, the show is generally willing to hope you don't think about it too hard. GRRM tends to prefer more rational behavior.

Long story short - I hope the tombs are meaningful in some way (relating to Jon or not), but they could just be a device to get people talking about Lyanna in both the book and the show.

Finally, I don't think it's impossible that Littlefinger knows. There could have been others at the ToJ. Just because Ned doesn't mention anybody else in his fever dream, that doesn't mean there wasn't anybody else there. Also, it's possible a kingsguard survived. Ned never explicitly states that they died. Just that he built cairns. Not necessarily saying this is the case. Just that it's possible. LF has a way of finding people who know things.

 

[Chib]

Spoiler

The most reliable leaks only talked about Bran saw Lyanna gave Ned a baby, then next scene changed to Jon. I am not sure about the leak with LF and Jon because it did not come from the most reliable leak. 

 

I think it is obvious Jon's parents will be confirmed by episode 10 unless they decided to cut it and save for next season. 

[Dragonslack]

Can't ser how ir why.

[W1NT3RF3LL]

On 6/21/2016 at 0:26 PM, MtnLion said:

No, it is very, very bad for the Starks as a whole if Jon is outed as a Targaryen.  Concealing that Jon is a Targaryen is high treason.  (Some secrets are too dangerous to reveal, even to those you most love.)  It will likely result in the entire family becoming light headed, so to speak.

By all of the laws of Westeros, an uncle never comes before his nephew (and when females can hold the position, niece). 

Its only high treason if the people of westeros see it as such.  I'm pretty sure considering the current state of affairs people would have no issue going to his side.  Especially considering he is still a Stark no matter how you look at it.  This would make an even stronger claim for him to be the heir to the throne.  I just can't see them or GRRM making such a big to do about his parentage and not revealing it, to me it would defeat the whole purpose.  Sure, I guess for storytelling its make it very compelling, however to keep it silent for so long even if it wasn't meant for him to sit the throne, just would be whole a lot to do for nothing.

[drayrock]

5 hours ago, Masha said:

Disagree on tomb 100%

Nothing in tomb.

Basic TOJ, Ned meets Lyanna, Lyanna unaudibly whispers something, see baby. One baby boy (Twins aren't happening same as Lady Stoneheart).  End scene - cut to adult Jon. No explanation, no Father's name and no nods on his legitimacy or Targ blood.

That'd be pretty weak imo. Leaves Jons arc hanging.

[Pile-O-Starks]

1 minute ago, drayrock said:

That'd be pretty weak imo. Leaves Jons arc hanging.

I agree, but that doesn't mean they won't do it. They did it last season with the whole "Jon's dead! For real!" business.

I think they will have the reveal come near the end of the episode through Bran's visions. The audience will find out that R+L=J, but Jon won't find out until sometime later.