Mezeh Posted May 9, 2007 Share Posted May 9, 2007 I agree that there is possible parallel with King Arthur story. Yet I want to remind again that Arthur had to prove himself as a king. In his case there was “sword in stone†and Merlin’s witness about his parentage. In our case Reed is definitely not a Merlin. And we don’t currently have any “swords in stoneâ€. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhaegon Targaryen Posted May 9, 2007 Share Posted May 9, 2007 I agree that there is possible parallel with King Arthur story. Yet I want to remind again that Arthur had to prove himself as a king. In his case there was “sword in stone†and Merlin’s witness about his parentage. In our case Reed is definitely not a Merlin. And we don’t currently have any “swords in stoneâ€. The Sword in the Stone could be getting on a dragon without getting eaten or burned alive. We know they sense Targaryen blood. (Brown Ben Plumm) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mezeh Posted May 9, 2007 Share Posted May 9, 2007 The Sword in the Stone could be getting on a dragon without getting eaten or burned alive. We know they sense Targaryen blood. (Brown Ben Plumm) Pmumm indeed claimed some dragon blood but he claimed many other things as well and there is no verification of that claim and no information that only persons with Targaryen blood could ride dragons. Most likely not since most likely Targaryens were not the only dragon riders of Valyria. Besides even if dragons could sense the blood I really doubt that they could see a difference between trueborn and bastards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Piper Posted May 9, 2007 Share Posted May 9, 2007 Which of course would mean that there was a Septon present as well to actually marry them. The cast keeps growing. What if they were married by Lyanna's tradition, that of the old gods? Then they wouldn't need a septon, just a heart tree, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Other-in-law Posted May 9, 2007 Share Posted May 9, 2007 What if they were married by Lyanna's tradition, that of the old gods? Then they wouldn't need a septon, just a heart tree, right? Indeed. And there just happens to be a weirwood at the very castle where Lyanna and Rhaegar first met. And one of the sons of the family that held that castle just happened to be at the ToJ with Lyanna at the end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Godot Posted May 9, 2007 Share Posted May 9, 2007 Indeed. And there just happens to be a weirwood at the very castle where Lyanna and Rhaegar first met. And one of the sons of the family that held that castle just happened to be at the ToJ with Lyanna at the end. Forgive me, but what does either of those things have to do with anything? It's unlikely that Rhaegar whisked Lyanna away at Harrenhal, and even less likely that Oswell Whent guarding the tower has any more significance then say, Gerold hightower guarding the tower. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kaeln Posted May 9, 2007 Share Posted May 9, 2007 Ned certainly thinks Jon is a bastard, but... If R+L = J, Rhaegar seems the kind of guy that would certainly marry Lyanna, and given the already established history of the Targs, he would consider the marriage valid. But the question is, would Ned consider the polygamous marriage valid? If he doesn't, then Jon goes back to the bastard column, in Ned's mind. And yes, having Jon learn who his parents are from one source and then finding out from another source about his legitimacy (well, in his parents mind, anyway) seems even more preposterous. The problem is that it is a given that, at the very least, various peasants at whatever castle Jon was born at know who his mother is, in addition to (if R+L = J) Reed, probably his kids, etc. I still think Doran knows the score and is keeping it quiet to use Jon as a pocket Targ should the need arise, which explains why the Dornish peasants are mute on the matter. Then again, in my mind it is already a given that Jon lives and goes back to rebuild the Wall as LC. Thus his legitimacy is a non-issue, and more importantly, something that Martin wouldn't care about explicitly implying (if you catch my drift) in Ned's thoughts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Errant Bard Posted May 9, 2007 Share Posted May 9, 2007 What if they were married by Lyanna's tradition, that of the old gods? Then they wouldn't need a septon, just a heart tree, right?It actually doesn't matter if they were married or not, only recognition is important. If they married and noone can spread the words it's as good as if it never happened. Similarly, if they didn't marry, it doesn't matter, as all we need is a credible bunch to support a lie to make it true, as long as noone can prove them false. Ergo, Jon could be the most genuine bastard in the world, Lyanna could have been abducted by Aerys, raped by a bear and gutted by Rhaegar, if Howland and Co decided to make Jon the son of Lyanna it wouldn't matter, because there is noone to disprove it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SFDanny Posted May 9, 2007 Share Posted May 9, 2007 Ergo, Jon could be the most genuine bastard in the world, Lyanna could have been abducted by Aerys, raped by a bear and gutted by Rhaegar, if Howland and Co decided to make Jon the son of Lyanna it wouldn't matter, because there is noone to disprove it. Ahhh .... the Quentin Tarantino version of "Anastasia"? Which goes to an earlier point (this thread or others?) about Daenerys being the only "court" that Jon's claim has to satisfy. Assuming, of course, her armies and Dragons make it to Westeros intact and under her control. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snake Posted May 9, 2007 Share Posted May 9, 2007 Why? He has no contact with his sister between her disappearance with Rhaegar and her death, at least none we know of. The only time he can find out about it is on her deathbed. There Lyanna's concerns have to be Jon's survival, not his future as King of Westeros, so it is possible she dies before telling Ned. Because he was there and he spoke to his sister. Unless she died moments after the fight he might have spoken to her at length and if she was with Rhaegar willingly he certainly would have asked her why she did what she did. Also, he would have questioned any servants who were about. There was ample opportunity and time for Ned to find out if Lyanna and Rhaegar were wed. There is powerful indirect evidence. The Kingsguard is there when they should be at Dragonstone with Viserys. Ned says as much in his questioning of his three opponents. The only real convincing reason for them to be there, if they have a choice, is because their duty to the heir means they should be there - because he is there. I don't buy that. The Kingsguard being at the ToJ is a mystery because by rights they should have been with Aerys, Rhaegar or baby Aegon. Those were the three heirs to the throne and those were the ones that needed protection so their duty lies with them. The fact that they weren't with either of the three implies, IMO, that they were ordered to be at the ToJ by Rhaegar. So my theory is that they were following through with their orders or trying to uphold the spirit of their vows in hopes to wipe out the taint the Kingslayer left upon their order. Lyanna is dying and her marriage is not the first thing on her mind. It is not strange in the least that any loyal servants would not tell Ned of the child's legitimate claim on the throne given what happened to Rhaegar's other children. Ned would have already known that the child was Rhaegar's and bastard or no the child would still have some claim and be dangerous to Robert. The fact that he is willing to risk all by raising the child as his own would let anyone know that he was no threat and therefore they would have no reason to hide the truth from him. Not rude. We just disagree. The passage, and I need to go back and read the context again, seems to have two major parts to it. One being the presence of so many bastards in the world and the other being the power of our loves/lusts in governing what we do. Your reading highlights the former, while mine highlights the latter. I don't see either as unreasonable, but I can see I can't convince you of my point. I'll reread the section and see if it helps to convince me you're right. They are coming from a brothel where they see one of Robert's bastards. Then an image of Jon's face comes to Ned and he immediately thinks why do the gods give men such lusts if they frown on bastards. I try but i really fail to see no connection there. I guess we all see what we want, or at least I've been accused of that a time or two. What if they were married by Lyanna's tradition, that of the old gods? Then they wouldn't need a septon, just a heart tree, right? I thought all the weirwoods were cut down in the south. They have godswoods but no weirwoods or heart trees in them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarella Posted May 10, 2007 Share Posted May 10, 2007 As to others holding the clues to part of the mystery and not all of it, what's wrong with that? There's nothing wrong with it, but I think it would be incredibly lame writing if all of a sudden these random characters we've never met show up just to say "Rhaegar and Lyanna were married". If Wylla knew that Jon was the true Targ heir, she surely by this time would have told Doran. He is plotting to reinstate the Targs, after all, and if Wylla knew something as important as the identity of the true Targ heir, she would tell Doran. But Doran obviously doesn't know about Jon, else he would be sending Arianne to him with the same kind of proposals he's sending Q to Dany with. And Varys doesn't know about the marriage (if there was one) because if he did know, he would be plotting to sit Jon on the throne, not Dany. In fact, I think that is a pretty good evidence that no marriage occured. Varys knows everything. Yet he knows of no marriage between Lyanna and Rhaegar. What I don't understand about the argument that Jon is the bastard child of Rhaegar and Lyanna is the presence of the Kingsguard at the Tower of Joy and Ned's questions to them seems to argue so loudly against this scenario. Why would they fight Ned and his companions to the death over a bastard child or a former mistress when their clear duty is to protect Viserys? If they have a choice about getting to Dragonstone, I'd submit they'd have gone if Viserys was their king. The KG were there because the crown prince ordered them to be there. KG obey orders. They are not going to break an order to run off and do what they think is right. Hell, they let Aerys beat his wife and did nothing about it. And on a slightly different note, I believe Rhaegar had every intention of legitimizing Jon at a later date. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Piper Posted May 10, 2007 Share Posted May 10, 2007 They are coming from a brothel where they see one of Robert's bastards. Then an image of Jon's face comes to Ned and he immediately thinks why do the gods give men such lusts if they frown on bastards. I try but i really fail to see no connection there. I guess we all see what we want, or at least I've been accused of that a time or two. Then, a bit later in that chapter, Ned thinks that Rheagar isn't one to visit brothels, which was linked with fathering bastards (i.e., giving in to lust). I'd say the one about Jon suggests he's a bastard, the one about Rhaegar saying he would never father a bastard, so take from that section what you will. I thought all the weirwoods were cut down in the south. They have godswoods but no weirwoods or heart trees in them. Arya prays by a heart tree at Harrenhal, right before she makes her third wish to Jaquen: Through the leafy canopy she could see the bone-white branches of the heart tree. It looks just like the one in Winterfell from here. If only it had been . . . then when she climbed down she would have been home again, and maybe find her father sitting under the weirwood where he always sat. Shoving her sword through her belt, she slipped down branch to branch until she was back on the ground. The light of the moon painted the limbs of the weirwood silvery white as she made her way toward it, but the five-pointed red leaves turned black by night. Arya stared at the face carved into its trunk. It was a terrible face, its mouth twisted, its eyes flaring and full of hate. Is that what a god looked like? Could gods be hurt, the same as people? I should pray, she thought suddenly. Also, they exist on the Isle of Faces, which likes convientently close to Harrenhal, and is (interestingly enough) also a place Howland was said to visit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarella Posted May 10, 2007 Share Posted May 10, 2007 It just occured to me another reason why it would suck if Jon is the true heir to the iron throne. He's already had the "choosing family or NW" dilemma once when Stannis offered him Winterfell, and he's like to have the same dilemma again when he finds out Robb named him King in the North. Do we really want yet ANOTHER repeat when he finds out his parentage? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DanteGabriel Posted May 10, 2007 Share Posted May 10, 2007 It just occured to me another reason why it would suck if Jon is the true heir to the iron throne. He's already had the "choosing family or NW" dilemma once when Stannis offered him Winterfell, and he's like to have the same dilemma again when he finds out Robb named him King in the North. Do we really want yet ANOTHER repeat when he finds out his parentage? Jon's (possible) great great great-uncle Aemon was tested three times, wasn't he? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Piper Posted May 10, 2007 Share Posted May 10, 2007 Jon's (possible) great great great-uncle Aemon was tested three times, wasn't he? Oh, I like that. So let's assume there'll be a parallel. Are we saying the first time for Jon was when he ran off, and they brought him back, and the second was when Stannis made the offer? Or does that first one not count because he didn't really choose to hold to his vows, he was sorta forced? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Godot Posted May 10, 2007 Share Posted May 10, 2007 It just occured to me another reason why it would suck if Jon is the true heir to the iron throne. He's already had the "choosing family or NW" dilemma once when Stannis offered him Winterfell, and he's like to have the same dilemma again when he finds out Robb named him King in the North. Do we really want yet ANOTHER repeat when he finds out his parentage? How will he find out Robb named him King in the North? I'd say that Jon's three choices are staying in the NW after his father was killed, leaving Ygritte, and refusing Winterfell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DanteGabriel Posted May 10, 2007 Share Posted May 10, 2007 Oh, I like that. So let's assume there'll be a parallel. Are we saying the first time for Jon was when he ran off, and they brought him back, and the second was when Stannis made the offer? Or does that first one not count because he didn't really choose to hold to his vows, he was sorta forced? I think Jon's first choice was the one given him by Stannis. It was a choice made of his own free will, and not because he was unwilling to kill his friends to escape. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DanteGabriel Posted May 10, 2007 Share Posted May 10, 2007 How will he find out Robb named him King in the North? I'd say that Jon's three choices are staying in the NW after his father was killed, leaving Ygritte, and refusing Winterfell. Are we absolutely sure Robb named Jon as his successor? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Godot Posted May 10, 2007 Share Posted May 10, 2007 Are we absolutely sure Robb named Jon as his successor? We are. But how again is that going to reach Jon? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DanteGabriel Posted May 10, 2007 Share Posted May 10, 2007 We are. But how again is that going to reach Jon? As far as I remember, Robb stated that he intended to name Jon as his heir during an argument with Catelyn. In a following chapter, Robb commanded his lords to affix their seals to his new succession document, with no further mention of whom he'd named. I can't help but think Martin constructed the storytelling that way to play silly buggers with us. So no, I'm not absolutely sure Robb named Jon as his heir. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.