Jump to content

The Lyanna + Rhaegar = Jon Thread, Part II


Werthead

Recommended Posts

There is a flip side to the coin: a tendency of yours to over-use this argument, to the point where people that show support for R+L=J, and who argue against your theories, are simply "sheep" who haven't "seen the light of your argument", even when it's the fallacies of your arguments that people are attacking directly. How do you expect to have a civilized discussion when your starting-off point in dealing with anyone that addresses your "arguments" is to assault them with taunts like "...and the sheep go baaaah!"

This isn't true. Look at all my posts where I have referred to an R+L=J advocate as a sheep. :) It's only in response to blatant disregard to supporting their position with facts. I don't say all R+L=J supporters are sheep. If you think I have, you are wrong. I say certain supporters are (when actually, I think many supporters of opposing beliefs meet the sheep criteria also. People who say "AEGON IS DEAD DEAD DEAD" are sheep :) ). This is an important disctinction.

And since I don't like leaving people with doubt, here is the post in question you reference where I have addressed someone as a sheep.

Post #130 in the thread "Do you want or need Jon to be a Targ."

I say this

And the sheep go "bahhhhhhhhhhh"

It is in response to this assertion.

The laws of probability are important and the probability that you will continue to embaress yourself with your non-existant reasoning and logic skills is enormous.

If someone takes their own word as being the entire basis to substantiate their arguement, then they are sheep. Many R+L=J supports have very rationale arguements and debate quite well. I think they're wrong, but people who disagree with me I don't consider sheep. Just those who proscribe to "group think" as Tyrion's Song often does. I hope this clarifies a few things. Cheerio.

Artanaro

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I personally feel that R+L=J, but I will say it is not certain. Not enough evidence yet.

I started reading this series when GoT came out, and I had a feeling that GRRM was skillfully dancing around R+L=J even way back then. Call me a sheep or whatever you want. I believed that before there was a "mob mentality" on the subject. It's said above that people aren't basing their opinions on "facts"... So what are the facts exactly?

1. Rhaegar and Lyanna were together for a time. Whether they were together consentually is unknown.

2. Lyanna gave birth. Lyanna is descibed as dying in her "bed of blood. That reference has been used at least one other time in the series to describe childbirth.

3. Lyanna made Eddard promise her something that later compromised his honor. Before he dies he thinks about that promise and what it cost him alot. What other lapse of honor is associated with Eddard other than his bastard child?

4. Someone in the royal family was at ToJ. When Eddard arrived at ToJ there were three of the Kingsguard protecting something. They weren't at the Ruby Ford or in K.L. with Rhaegar or Aerys. Why?

5. Eddard went to Starfall to return Dawn. He killed Ser Arthur Dayne and then had several very good reasons to go to Starfall. a. To explain to Ashara that he had married another. b. To return Dawn. c. To get help in taking care of a child.

6. Eddard returned from the South with a child whose birth fits the time period when Lyanna died. This is Eddard whose honor, we learn later, meant more to him than his life. I'm supposed to believe that, right after Eddard got married and went to war, he sired a bastard on a peasant girl?

There are many other facts, and there are other scenarios that could fit them. But to me the picture that GRRM is painting of that time period has a big empty space in it, and that space looks like Jon Snow to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just those who proscribe to "group think" as Tyrion's Song often does.

Exactly. And you are ever so happy to prop yourself up as the arbiter of what does and does not constitute "group think." In the specific case you mention, Tyrion's Song had watched me annihilate your bogus (and horrifyingly ironic, given the alternate theory you attempt to prop up in its place) "probabilistic" argument as to why R+L=J can't be true (I know you'll probably pop a brain vein at that characterization, but that's surely how he saw it, and frankly, you did embarrass yourself in that thread). Therein lies the distinction you have thusfar shown yourself incapable of making: expressing agreement with somebody else does not necessarily constitute "group think".

That is to say, there is a difference between watching someone make an argument against one of your "theories" and agreeing with that person's assessment (not "group think"), vs. agreeing with someone simply because that's what the majority thinks (essentially the definition of "group think" as you are using it). You regularly mistake the first as the second.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is interesting that GRRM has very rarely actually mentioned the theory in reports, as if he is staying away from it. One of the few times was this:

I asked about getting more info about Jon's parentage at the Menlo Park Q&As . . . he mentioned that it wouldn't be in #4 but it would be in #5 and on . . . so, we can argue about Rhaegar and Lyanna for the next several years;

Obviously this was pre-AFFC, so I imagine now that we'll get the definite answer in the penultimate book (which is now #6). This comment, combined with Parris' infamous "You think he'd do something that obvious?" comment, leads me to suspect that the theory will be disproven, probably in a manner no-one's quite hit on yet.

I did like this one though:

Krafus: "Rhaegar is described by Ser Barristan and Ser Jorah Mormont as being melancholy and noble and honorable. That hardly strikes me as the kind of man who'd cheat on his wife, especially at such a public event as the tourney at Harrenhal. So why did he did he choose Lyanna as queen of love an beauty?"

GRRM: "Good question."

My pet theory always has been that Rhaegar thought he needed three children to fulfil the PWWP prophecy, but that Elia was too sick to survive a third childbirth. Rhaegar convinced Elia (who is a Martell of Dorne, remember, not exactly a blushing violet) that this child was needed and he convinced her of the need to fulfil the prophecy. Thus she agreed that he needed to find another woman to give him a child.

By the way, the sword Dawn are nothing to do with the War for the Dawn. The WftD was eight thousand years ago. Dawn has only existed for two thousand years:

Trebla: "You've mentioned that Dawn has an illustrious history -- is there a ballpark figure for how long the Daynes and/or Starfall/Dawn have existed?"

GRRM: "Oh, I'd say Dawn goes back a couple thousand years... and before that, things get a little fuzzy anyway."

It possibly inspired the name, or it may have been a play on Dorne/Dawn (which I assume comes from the Arm of Dorne/Arm to the Dawn, the land-bridge leading to the eastern continent).

EDIT: Hang on

Wethers: "How could Edric Dayne and Jon Snow be milk brothers if they are several years apart in age - 12 and 16 or so? Can a nursemaid really produce milk for so long a stretch, or perhaps did Wylla have a(nother) kid of her own when Edric was born? Or if Edric was lying, and why didn't Arya call him on it?" GRRM: "Edric is stretching the term a little... "milk brothers" more usually refers to two infants of different parents who were nursed simultaneously by the same woman, but Jon had long been parted from Wylla's breasts by the time Ned came along."

Possible confirmation that Wylla did nurse Jon? So she probably still knows the truth of his parentage, wherever she is (probably at Starfall). Doesn't disprove L+R=J (she could have nursed him after Ned arrived from the Tower of Joy with the baby), but perhaps throws a smidgen more support in the way of Ashara being the mother? Presumably if it was Wylla herself who was the mother, then Ned Dayne would have used a different term.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Obviously this was pre-AFFC, so I imagine now that we'll get the definite answer in the penultimate book (which is now #6). This comment, combined with Parris' infamous "You think he'd do something that obvious?" comment, leads me to suspect that the theory will be disproven, probably in a manner no-one's quite hit on yet.

It's going to be wonderful if the theory is disproven in a way that makes even more sense. But R + L = J fits the facts so well, like putting on an old shoe. I didn't figure it out by myself; I felt something was wrong but I didn't know what. Why did Ned think so much about Lyanna? What did she make him promise? R + L = J makes things fall into place simply and naturally and I'm afraid any other explanation will be contrived. I hope not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regarding the (frequent) comments about R+L=J being too "obvious", all I can say is, I didn't figure it out after my first reading. I mean, it was clear that there was some important secret with respect to Lyanna's death or Ned wouldn't be dwelling on it all the time. But I had no idea what it was. This is true of several other intelligent readers with whom I've discussed the theory. They all reacted more or less as I did when I first read about it online: surprise followed by acceptance. The clues in the text do fit the theory.

That the clues fit does not make it certain, of course: just a good guess.

Benjen (above) offers a good brief summary of the evidence, and I also agree with Werthead that the involvement of Rhaegar and Lyanna was somehow impelled by the PWWP prophecy. We know that it drove Rhaegar's choices in life - after hearing it he went from being a bookish child who avoided weapons training to someone determined to be an excellent warrior. Perhaps when he first heard it he thought he was the PWWP and only later decided it was to be his child.

Robert believed that Rhaegar abducted and raped Lyanna, and hated him for it, but it's not clear what Ned thought. The one time he muses on Rhaegar it's about whether Rhaegar frequented brothels, and he decides he didn't. It's not much of a clue, but it suggests that Ned at least did not believe Rhaegar to be a man of uncontrollable lusts. Of course he rode with Robert agains the Targaryens, but he had plenty of reason to do that besides whatever happened between Lyanna and Rhaegar.

In fact, Robert seems to be the only one who remembers Rhaegar with loathing. (Can anyone recall another?) To me this suggests that Rhaegar's "abduction" of Lyanna had some motivation other than simple lust. It's entirely out of character with everything else we know about him. If he truly believed that only a child of his and Lyanna's could save the world, he is presented as the kind of man who would sacrifice reputation, and risk tearing the kingdom apart, in order to fulfill the prophecy. From the little we know of Lyanna, she seems daring and idealistic enough to take those risks too. For what is a spot of civil war, and even the death of loved ones, when weighed against the end of the world?

My guess is that Rhaegar's thinking on the prophecy evolved over time, possibly with input from Aemon. Perhaps in the beginning he thought he was the PWWP, then later that it was his son Aegon (that seems to be what is suggested in Dany's vision in the warlock's house in Qarth.) But for someone who thought nonstop about "the song of ice and fire" perhaps meeting Lyanna Stark changed his understanding. If the Targaryens were fire, the Starks were ice. And here was this beautiful, gallant Stark girl. Perhaps Rhaegar came to believe that only the child of himself and Lyanna could save the world from the coming war with the Others, and that his children with Elia would be the other two heads of the dragon. It all fits.

But, again, the fact that it fits doesn't make it so. I tend to believe it, but only GRRM knows the truth. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is my last post on the "Arthur Dayne is important" issue. I speed read Jaime's chapters in AFfC and he mentions Arthur Dayne 3 times against 9 times for Lancel, Osmund Kettleblack, and Moon Boy. He thinks about Arthur Dayne in his first chapter, when he's standing beside his father's body and does a good deal of thinking. Concerning Arthur Dayne, he remember when he took his vows as a knight. He also thinks of Aerys (predictably), Rhaegar, Ser Jon Darry, Brienne, and lots of people.

The second and the third times are when he's talking to Gatehouse Ami and her mother about the outlaws, Lady Stoneheart's men. Ami says Jaime would know what to do with them because he had killed the Smiling Knight. Jaime says he didn't kill the Smiling Knight, it was Ser Arthur Dayne, and he tells the story. And Arthur Dayne is mentioned no more.

It's interesting that, when Jaime and Loras are talking about the great knights of the past, they don't mention Arthur Dayne (this is the Kingmaker conversation). In another chapter, when Jaime thinks he's not exactly a very honorable knight, he thinks he's not Aemon the Dragonknight, not Arthur Dayne.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll take even money for Sorrio vs. a knight........ Best knight does not make best worrior....

If Aegon was the PtwP it ended with his death (I'll just go with him being dead). After all, he wouldn't be the last to be prophisied (sp) and then die (the one who mounts the would....).

Can someone enlighen me on the PtwP and where we see it besides with Danny in the warlock's house in Qarth. Because if he is supposed to have a son around that is supposed to save the world, that just seems to feed R + L = J.

I know millison (sp) thinks Stannis is supposed to save the wourld, I can't help but think her vision is wrong and it's Jon...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From their names of his children alone it appears that Rhaegar was trying to draw a parrael between his kids and Aegon the 1st with his sister wives. It looks like Rhaegar probably intended to end up with a daughter named Visenya from Lyanna. It also seems clear Rhaegar thought that the lone male child, Aegon would be the most impotent person in the relationship, just as the 1st Aegon was.

I have always wondered however where Rhaegar got this interpretation, did he read it or Green Dream it? Daron Targaryen could Green Dream so it seems possible Rhaegar could too. Rhaegar might have had a true dream and like Jonjen interpreted it wrong.

But their is one nagging issue I have with saying Rhaegar simply was wrong and his third child is the Prince That Was Promised (PTWP). The problem is any living child would be a king or queen, not a prince.This wording may indicate merely the lack of a coronation to become king or perhaps prophecy viewed Maester Aemon as the true king but it's still unclear. Even with a few questions however the preponderance of evidence is for the simplest R+L=Jon theory and as of yet I have heard no better explanation that doesn't significantly depart from the text.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Answers: The Reeds have them all!

R + L = J Well, I thought as much before coming to this board, I think as much at this present moment, I have been swayed both ways by arguments for & against & I still think Jon Snow is the Prince That Was Promised.

Book 5 seems to be the one where GRRM indicates that he will clarify Jon's parentage. Methinks he will be true to form & name a few possible combinations, with Howland's coming late in the piece, if not in Book 6.

Whether Meera & Jojen know it, I dunno, but you'd think they do given their circumspect story to Bran & relative proximity to Jon at present.

No one else is alive from the TOJ to give evidence (unless they can necromance Ned's bones)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wylla is still alive and she knows the truth. Barristan Selmy could possibly know that Lyanna was pregnant but no more than that.

As I said before, GRRM said he'd spell out the truth in Book 5 before he decided to write AFFC, so now it'll probably be Book 6. We may get additional clues in Book 5 though.

An interesting question to ask GRRM at some point would be if the original Aegon, Rhaenys and Visenya all had the same parents. Did Rhaenys and Aegon have the same mother and Visenya a different one? Does that mean we have to start thinking that there may be a girl child out there who could be Lyanna and Rhaegar's? Or is this whole line of thinking a red herring? Why did Rhaegar name his children after the original three rulers of Westeros though? Is there a hitherto unrevealed link between Aegon and his sisters and the Prince Who Was Promised prophecy?

:unsure:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

An interesting question to ask GRRM at some point would be if the original Aegon, Rhaenyra and Visenya all had the same parents. Did Rhaenyra and Aegon have the same mother and Visenya a different one?

Wasn't her name Rhaenys?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alright I don't know if anyone else has noticed this before, but if R+L=J is true and say the theory that Tyrion maybe be a Targ as well then Jon, Tyrion, and Dany all grew up without knowing thier mothers and all three mothers died in childbirth. Just thought that was kinda interesting if some of these theories prove true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wylla is still alive and she knows the truth.

The fact that Wylla claims Jon was her child to her leige Lord (Edric) is pretty important. It cetrtainly seems to be what Edric believes. If the child was not in fact a product of W+E then what would make her say that?

Certainly a stumbling block when supporting R+L=J. But not a show stopper.

What exactly did Eddard tell Ashara when he showed up at Starfall? He had a bastard child, her brother's famous sword, and the news that he'd married another woman. Ouch. Ashara supposedly threw herself into the sea after learning that (or so Edric believes). Did she do it out of grief for her brother and lost love alone, or did she do it to hide the truth of the child's origin as well?

Ned wasn't the most adept guy at lying and intrigue, that is made pretty plain in GoT. Maybe the idea to proclaim Jon as Ned's bastard was Ashara's idea? It may explain how Wylla got sucked into this whole thing.

Wylla is a servant of house Dayne, right? Lady Ashara may have asked her to nurse the child, and then thereafter claim that it was her child with Eddard. The fact that it could have been Ashara's last request, would certainly carry some weight.

Having said all that, I don't think Wylla will be the only woman put forward as Jon's mother. Other people have claimed to know who Jon's mother was in the past (Winterfell's rumors about Ashara, Edric says it's Wylla, Lord Borrell ... oops that's in DwD). I think there will be others in the future who will add more names to that list.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4. Someone in the royal family was at ToJ. When Eddard arrived at ToJ there were three of the Kingsguard protecting something. They weren't at the Ruby Ford or in K.L. with Rhaegar or Aerys. Why?

There is at least one other instance to suggest that the Kingsguard are not always with the king and his family. When Robert and his family went up to Winterfell at the start of AGOT, only three of the Kingsguard went with them, Ser Meryn, Ser Boros, and the Kingslayer. What were the other four (Ser Mandon, Ser Preston, Ser Barristan, and Ser Arys) doing? Granted, "royal family" could be meant to include the king's brothers, but none were with Stannis on Dragonstone, leaving four to guard Renly, if all they could be doing was guarding royalty. Seems unlikely. If Robert’s Kingsguard can be set to other duties, so too could his predecessor’s. I think it's plausible that Rhaegar put them to guarding Lyanna, even if there was no royal child there. Nothing to disprove it, just saying it's not definite.

As to the theory, I'm on the fence, like that above evidence I think most things can go many ways. One quote always sticks out, though, as Ned rides back after visiting with one of Robert's bastards:

"Riding through the rainy night, Ned saw Jon Snow's face in front of him, so like a younger version of his own. If the gods frowned so on bastards, he thought dully, why did they fill men with such lust?"

Obviously doesn't prove anything, but I think the implication is that Jon was the product of "such lust." Rhaegar, Ned thinks later and as someone posted earlier, wasn't one to frequent brothels; the implication here is that Rhaegar wasn't one to give into "such lust."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did she do it out of grief for her brother and lost love alone, or did she do it to hide the truth of the child's origin as well?

Ever since I mused over the possibilities offered by Ashara's disappearance in relation to the various crackpot theories sprouting off the board, I've always wanted Ashara to have been killed by Eddard, as a side effect from his promise to Lyanna. It would have added much spin to the tragic hero jig that Ned had going.

Now more seriously, why assume that if Ashara fell, it was her choice? Did anyone see her jump or fall, and was it really her? Might be something to ask GRRM, that. After all, in asoiaf, Balon and Lysa also felt what it's like to fly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is at least one other instance to suggest that the Kingsguard are not always with the king and his family. When Robert and his family went up to Winterfell at the start of AGOT, only three of the Kingsguard went with them, Ser Meryn, Ser Boros, and the Kingslayer. What were the other four (Ser Mandon, Ser Preston, Ser Barristan, and Ser Arys) doing? Granted, "royal family" could be meant to include the king's brothers, but none were with Stannis on Dragonstone, leaving four to guard Renly, if all they could be doing was guarding royalty. Seems unlikely. If Robert’s Kingsguard can be set to other duties, so too could his predecessor’s. I think it's plausible that Rhaegar put them to guarding Lyanna, even if there was no royal child there. Nothing to disprove it, just saying it's not definite.

I see what you're saying LPOP, but when Robert travelled north there wasn't a civil war going on. And why would the KG need to protect Lyanna from Eddard anyway? He's her brother and reputed to be an honorable guy. What's the harm in letting a brother help his sister? If they were there to protect Lyanna, why would they let her bleed to death and not go seek some aid?

Because they weren't there to protect Lyanna. They were there to protect the baby from Robert's wrath. It just so happened that Robert never showed up.

...why assume that if Ashara fell, it was her choice? Did anyone see her jump or fall, and was it really her? Might be something to ask GRRM, that.

Why assume? Because I love to make an ass out of myself. :D

Seriously, it is quite possible that she didn't jump, or that it was someone else who fell. I just like to think she isn't yet another character in the books who is supposed to be dead but isn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see what you're saying LPOP, but when Robert travelled north there wasn't a civil war going on. And why would the KG need to protect Lyanna from Eddard anyway? He's her brother and reputed to be an honorable guy. What's the harm in letting a brother help his sister? If they were there to protect Lyanna, why would they let her bleed to death and not go seek some aid?

Because they weren't there to protect Lyanna. They were there to protect the baby from Robert's wrath. It just so happened that Robert never showed up.

It's true there was no war, but does that mean that four of them, including the Lord Commander, stayed away from the king for the months it must have taken to reach the north, feated in Winterfell, and returned? Maybe not all of them need go, but fewer than half were there. Three knights to guard the king, the queen, and three kids (granted the Hound was there to watch Joff), while the rest hung around playing poker? Either way, it shows the point that the Kingsguard can, if so commanded, be away from the family for stretches of time.

As for the Tower of Joy, if they were there to guard Jon from Robert and saw that Eddard was there instead, why not just give Jon up? As you said, he's an honorable guy. Then they could have trusted Ned to keep Jon safe and then sailed off to help Willem Darry guard Viserys and Dany.

You might be right, I just think it's equally plausible that they were there only to guard Lyanna. They wouldn't give Lyanna to Ned because that was what Rhaegar commanded them to do, keep her in the Tower no matter what.

(And my best answer is that they let her bleed to death because they were dead already by that time, as Ned was near enough to hear her last words.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...