Heresy Project X+Y=J: Wrap up thread 2

[Little Scribe of Naath]

Where are we getting the assumption that Quaithe is a benefactor of Dany's? And how does Quaithe figure into this at all?

.If we got a maester's account of the Wot5K years later without the POVs, we would still have the basic events ---> Arryn's death, Bran's fall, Renly's death, Ned's execution, Tyrion/Sansa wedding, RW, PW, Mountain v/s Oberyn, etc. These events would be accepted knowledge by everyone in-world, just like Rheagar and Lyanna disappearing together, or Dany's birth. What we wouldn't know is the motivation and the shadow players behind these events -  the actual event wouldn't be in question. 

So it's not a very convincing argument to dismiss what is accepted in-world knowledge on a major event just because we don't have a POV.  Besides, on the Rhaegar-Lyanna disappearance, we have nothing 5 books on in the text indicating that we should doubt that account of events. 

In the case of Jon Arryn's murder, we have this:

Quote

"Lord Arryn was a kindly, trusting man." The eunuch sighed. "There was one boy. All he was, he owed to Jon Arryn, but when the widow fled to the Eyrie with her household, he stayed in King's Landing and prospered. It always gladdens my heart to see the young rise in the world." The whip was in his voice again, every word a stroke.

Do we have any such massive red flag in the text like this, to indicate that we should doubt the account of Rhaegar and Lyanna disappearing together ? 

 

[Therae]

7 minutes ago, Sly Wren said:

There are holes in Dany's story--starting with her first POV. And Martin keeps having Quaithe (strangely attached to Dany) show up to tell Dany to "remember" who she is. Not to mention that Martin's had Dany VERY closely identified with Rhaegar--not with Viserys or Aerys--since book one. And reinforces it in the HOTU. And even later, too.

So, it wouldn't be completely out of left field. He's laid some groundwork.

As for "a single person in universe"--there's not a single person in universe (that we've met) who doubts Jon is Ned's son. Not even Jon. And only two living in universe people who has knowledge Baelish was behind the War of the 5 Kings and Arryn's death.

Quaithe is a mystery, for sure.  I always felt what she was saying to Dany was less literal, though, and more to the effect of "quit getting distracted in Essos and go home."

Rhaegar is her brother, and according to most folks who aren't Robert, a much better person to take after than either her father or her other brother (and if the Targaryan coin toss is in effect, then odds dictate Dany should be the not-mad type).

If we take the question of Ned's paternity out of the mix, Jon's birth is still an established mystery. It's true that no one doubts Jon is his, but there are certainly examples of folks who are surprised that Ned did the necessary deed to get him. I think we'd all--in universe and out--be even more surprised if Ned did the deed with Lyanna, but you are right: Ned not fathering Jon is officially speculation. And we still don't know who Jon's mother is, so it can't help being a mystery, especially since he really, really wants to know.

I don't know that I would compare Baelish's various plots and the lack of knowledge about them as quite the same apples as mystery births. Even if folks were on the completely wrong track, there were deaths that didn't seem right, and folks trying to prove it. No one is trying to discover anything about Dany's birth.

I would be really, seriously gobsmacked if it turns out she is not who we think she is.

[Sly Wren]

17 minutes ago, Little Scribe of Naath said:

Where are we getting the assumption that Quaithe is a benefactor of Dany's? And how does Quaithe figure into this at all?

HA! My apologies for going off on a tangent.

But the assumption that she's benefactor: of the three Dany meets at Qarth that day, she's the only one who speaks with a Westerosi accent. And later looks at Dany with wet and shiny (tear-filled?) eyes. And the only one who warns Dany vs. trying to get something form her. And then shows up in a waking dream to warn Dany again. Then comes in another vision. Quaithe clearly matters. The question is why.

Quaithe's possibly being Ashara and Dnay's mother is a bug in my brain. But that's just a tangential tie to the XYJ discussion. So, my apologies.

Quote

.If we got a maester's account of the Wot5K years later without the POVs, we would still have the basic events ---> Arryn's death, Bran's fall, Renly's death, Ned's execution, Tyrion/Sansa wedding, RW, PW, Mountain v/s Oberyn, etc. These events would be accepted knowledge by everyone in-world, just like Rheagar and Lyanna disappearing together, or Dany's birth. What we wouldn't know is the motivation and the shadow players behind these events -  the actual event wouldn't be in question. 

Agree on a lot of this--but the bolded: we don't actually have that on page. So, that might not be accurate. And Dany's birth--the story we've got has holes.

But yes: the motivations are a key part.

That said: Ned (and most readers--or at least me) thought he had the right "motive" for Arryn's death. He didn't--it was a good motive--covering up incest. But Cersei and Jaime, though they had the motive, means, and opportunity, still weren't the ones who did it.

Who did it will matter, too. Not just the motives. And the Maesters could hypothetically never get the Baelish angle. I'm hoping Sansa comes to her senses and processes that info. But if she doesn't, there's no one else that we know of who's alive to tell that tale.

Besides, if the Lannisters were in control, the Maesters might very well start the story with Ned's treachery. And just assign Arryn's death to natural causes. 

One way or another--there's a good chance we aren't just missing "motives" in the story of Robert's Rebellion. We may be assigning actions to people who didn't do them.

ETA: on the Arryn quote: we have the red flag of Tywin's anger at Aerys. And it's getting much worse over Jaime. And Tywin's not being at Harrenhal because of it. And the Defiance of Duskendale. And the Red Wedding. And his sitting out the war against his enemy that we know he wants dead. Athe Rebellion as working out so very well for Tywin.

Not a single big flag. But a collection of clear, red motives and actions via Tywin. 

[Runaway Penguin]

Jon: Two people of importance knew. Well, plus at least one wet nurse, but these are usually overlooked anyway. Ned and Howland. Now only Howland knows. It IS possible Ned told Benjen. All three are good at keeping secrets.

Jon Arryn: Littlefinger, Lysa and the squire know. Lysa is isolated, Littlefinger is good at keeping secret, squire gets murdered.

Contrary to that, Queen's arrival and stay on Dragonstone (along with her pregnancy) were not likely to have just few witnesses - as well as the birth. The garrison would speak after surrendering - "assault on Dragonstone" does not speak about any substantial casualties, so it was likely similar to US Marines landing in the Tokio Bay in 1945. Too many witnesses. Secret switcheroo cannot be obviously ruled out, but... also does not have much support.

And yes, Viserys is an unreliable narrator. The "hired knives" and escapes may be as much the doing of paranoia he got after his father - after all, Dany also gets quite paranoid at times in connection to the "three betrayals". It might even have beenfed by Varys - after all next to deranged Viserys, fAegon would shine even more.

[Sly Wren]

12 minutes ago, Therae said:

Quaithe is a mystery, for sure.  I always felt what she was saying to Dany was less literal, though, and more to the effect of "quit getting distracted in Essos and go home."

Agreed. And if she didn't keep showing up via what I can only assume is a glass candle, I'd be more likely to say that. But she's more careful towards Dany from the start. And then keeps popping up. Something's up there.

12 minutes ago, Therae said:

Rhaegar is her brother, and according to most folks who aren't Robert, a much better person to take after than either her father or her other brother (and if the Targaryan coin toss is in effect, then odds dictate Dany should be the not-mad type).

Agreed. That may be all it is. But it's pretty marked--she call Viserys no dragon. Agrees Rhaegar is the last dragon. And then sees herself in his armor while thinking he's the last dragon. Then wakes her dragons after calling herself "the Dragon's Daughter." All in the first book. And the HOTU--Dany doesn't yet know Aerys was really horrible. But she has no emotional connection with that vision at all. STRONG connection with Rhaegar. And he looks at her when he says "one more."

Could just be coincidence. But if she's Rhaegar's kid, all of that fits really, really nicely.

12 minutes ago, Therae said:

If we take the question of Ned's paternity out of the mix, Jon's birth is still an established mystery. It's true that no one doubts Jon is his, but there are certainly examples of folks who are surprised that Ned did the necessary deed to get him. I think we'd all--in universe and out--be even more surprised if Ned did the deed with Lyanna, but you are right: Ned not fathering Jon is officially speculation. And we still don't know who Jon's mother is, so it can't help being a mystery, especially since he really, really wants to know.

Agreed. 

12 minutes ago, Therae said:

I don't know that I would compare Baelish's various plots and the lack of knowledge about them as quite the same apples as mystery births. Even if folks were on the completely wrong track, there were deaths that didn't seem right, and folks trying to prove it. No one is trying to discover anything about Dany's birth.

All fair. The doubt seems to be raised for readers. As the idea of Ned's not being Jon's father is more for readers. 

12 minutes ago, Therae said:

I would be really, seriously gobsmacked if it turns out she is not who we think she is.

HA! Well, the one thing Martin gobsmacked me on was Lysa's confession at the Moon Door. And it was a fun twist--if awkwardly delivered. So, here's hoping he has some more stunning surprises in store, one way or another. 

[Little Scribe of Naath]

20 minutes ago, Sly Wren said:

HA! My apologies for going off on a tangent.

But the assumption that she's benefactor: of the three Dany meets at Qarth that day, she's the only one who speaks with a Westerosi accent. And later looks at Dany with wet and shiny (tear-filled?) eyes. And the only one who warns Dany vs. trying to get something form her. And then shows up in a waking dream to warn Dany again. Then comes in another vision. Quaithe clearly matters. The question is why.

Quaithe's possibly being Ashara and Dnay's mother is a bug in my brain. But that's just a tangential tie to the XYJ discussion. So, my apologies.

I'm of a totally different opinion on Quaithe (and I don't think she's Ashara at all) but this is not the thread, so I won't elaborate here.

20 minutes ago, Sly Wren said:

But yes: the motivations are a key part.

That said: Ned (and most readers--or at least me) thought he had the right "motive" for Arryn's death. He didn't--it was a good motive--covering up incest. But Cersei and Jaime, though they had the motive, means, and opportunity, still weren't the ones who did it.

Who did it will matter, too. Not just the motives. And the Maesters could hypothetically never get the Baelish angle. I'm hoping Sansa comes to her senses and processes that info. But if she doesn't, there's no one else that we know of who's alive to tell that tale.

Besides, if the Lannisters were in control, the Maesters might very well start the story with Ned's treachery. And just assign Arryn's death to natural causes. 

One way or another--there's a good chance we aren't just missing "motives" in the story of Robert's Rebellion. We may be assigning actions to people who didn't do them.

ETA: on the Arryn quote: we have the red flag of Tywin's anger at Aerys. And it's getting much worse over Jaime. And Tywin's not being at Harrenhal because of it. And the Defiance of Duskendale. And the Red Wedding. And his sitting out the war against his enemy that we know he wants dead. Athe Rebellion as working out so very well for Tywin.

Not a single big flag. But a collection of clear, red motives and actions via Tywin. 

Agree completely on this. I'm on board with questioning Rhaegar's motives at the HH tourney, in taking Lyanna, who the shadow players were, and so on,  but I'm not inclined to question the event itself. That's probably because, to me, we have precious little to work with in the first place, and if we start questioning everything, we're almost completely directionless. But that's my take.

On the bolded: Yes, the best bet for the shadow players are the Maester's and Tywin. For red flags, we have the unnatural deaths of so many of Aerys and Rhaella's children, Tywin indirectly goading Aerys to go to Duskendale, stuff like that...and for the maesters, we have the information of Lady Dustin (admittedly we can't be sure of this, because I don't know why she was saying that to Reek/Theon, so I assumed that from a Doylist perspective, GRRM was trying to drop hints there).

So we have some ground to doubt these guys from the text. 

Most importantly, TWOIAF was written by a biased person (Maester Yandel), which is true. But one must ask, biased towards who? If he had interests in hiding or fudging something, it would be the maester's dirty work behind the scenes. Or - he got most of his info on Aerys' reign from Pycelle, who is the biggest Tywin lapdog around. He'd be the last person to reveal what Tywin was upto. Plus the book was being written for a Lannister kid.

In fact, it's reflected in how Tywin was praised to the skies in TWOIAF, as if he was the greatest hand ever, so dutiful that he swallowed all the insults thrown at him by Aerys, thanklessly did his job despite that.....BS, IMO. His crimes were erased as well.  

[Sly Wren]

11 minutes ago, Runaway Penguin said:

Secret switcheroo cannot be obviously ruled out, but... also does not have much support.

Unless it happened after Viserys and his "original" sister escaped. 

Dany remembers being taken from her safe place with her very un-Darry-like Darry. So, switch could have happened when she was older.

[SFDanny]

1 hour ago, Sly Wren said:

Well, the things that struck me were things like what we were working on here (just a Forensic File).

Such as why Dany insists she never sees anyone chasing them while Viserys insists that they are. Why on earth the servants put Dany and Viserys out after Darry's death--they were the valuable ones, not Darry. Why would his death have made them less valuable? Especially since they found refuge elsewhere? "Darry's" being half blind and completely bed ridden. Apparently his health plummeted after his being sent to protect Viserys and the Queen. Either that, or Dany's "Darry" isn't Darry. Things like this.

On their own, they aren't proof. Anymore than Ned's memories in the crypt are proof that something's up with Lyanna. But they do show that Dany doubts Viserys' judgment. And that there are logical holes in the backstory Viserys gave her.

Well, to the first we have with fairly high confidence from Robert himself that there were no assassins sent because Jon Arryn was able to persuade Robert against the use of them. We also know Robert knows enough about the Targaryen's security to think it would have been easy to have killed them long ago. Which seems to suggest he had spies watching them. How then does this touch on the truth of Dany's account? It doesn't call it into question. It just goes along with Daenerys's view of her brother that he has an overinflated sense of his importance. So, if anything, this tends to support Dany's view of her world as more trustworthy on the subject than her brother's. Not exactly a surprise.

Why were the Targaryens put out of the house with the red door? Because of a change in who was the Sealord perhaps? We have a document signed by Ser Willem Darry, Prince Oberyn, and the Sealord of Braavos, so we know the Sealord involved himself in a secret pact that held, not only the fate of the Targaryens, but that of Dorne as well, in the balance. I don't think we can argue this is a fake, with the high price Prince Doran places on the execution of the agreement. He pledges his daughter and heir to Viserys, for gods sake. So, why would we doubt the pact was signed in Braavos? I don't think we should.

Regarding, Ser Willem's health and his "smooth hands," this is an amazing use of the banal to manufacture clues. People get old. People get sick. People die of sickness. People who work with their hands develop hard hands; when they stop using their hands for work as they get older their hands get smoother. None of this is evidence the man in question is not Ser Willem Darry. Certainly, Prince Oberyn knows who Darry was. His signature tells us that Dorne knew who they were dealing with in Braavos.

So, my response, Sly Wren, is that not only are these things not proof of anything, they aren't clues that anything is other than what we know. Certainly, there are details we would like to know, but the broad strokes of the "evidence" is what the pact tells us. And that corroborates Dany's tale of the house with the red door in Braavos.

My apologies, Sly Wren, but I have to go. I will try to finish a response to your other points, and to @JNR and @The Snowfyre Chorus later tonight. 

[Runaway Penguin]

Then you would have to have quite a lot of people in the Free Cities who seen them... and who may get suspicious. Not all of them can be on the conspiracy. 

As for "someone else's role" in the Lyanna affair, I do not think there needs to be a third party in the eloping/abduction/whatever. But who gave Brandon Stark the bright idea to go to King's Landing and demand combat? And maybe even someone not sending Rhaegar correct info to his retreat. Someone who he would trust... Tywin's Pycelle?

The biggest mystery with Rhaegar is the long time he did nothing during the war. Was he building strength to cast Aerys down and seize po¨wer himself? Did he go to Trident ony because he knew that he cannot ever negotiate with Robert and he must kill him?

[Sly Wren]

19 minutes ago, Little Scribe of Naath said:

I'm of a totally different opinion on Quaithe (and I don't think she's Ashara at all) but this is not the thread, so I won't elaborate here.

All fair. And I need to end my tangents immediately.

19 minutes ago, Little Scribe of Naath said:

Agree completely on this. I'm on board with questioning Rhaegar's motives at the HH tourney, in taking Lyanna, who the shadow players were, and so on,  but I'm not inclined to question the event itself. That's probably because, to me, we have precious little to work with in the first place, and if we start questioning everything, we're almost completely directionless. But that's my take.

And I would be much less inclined to question it if we had anyone claiming to have witnessed it--even from afar. Or from a misinterpreting perspective. Or at least didn't have that snarky comment in the World Book.

And I agree we have precious little to work with. Which is one of the reasons I doubt something we have no account of. But that may just be my overly suspicious nature. 

19 minutes ago, Little Scribe of Naath said:

Most importantly, TWOIAF was written by a biased person (Maester Yandel), which is true. But one must ask, biased towards who? If he had interests in hiding or fudging something, it would be the maester's dirty work behind the scenes. Or - he got most of his info on Aerys' reign from Pycelle, who is the biggest Tywin lapdog around. He'd be the last person to reveal what Tywin was upto. Plus the book was being written for a Lannister kid.

In fact, it's reflected in how Tywin was praised to the skies in TWOIAF, as if he was the greatest hand ever, so dutiful that he swallowed all the insults thrown at him by Aerys, thanklessly did his job despite that.....BS, IMO. His crimes were erased as well.  

I had not even thought of that--even though I went through the Duskendale stuff with a fine toothed comb for one of my theories. Well done!

And amen!

9 minutes ago, Runaway Penguin said:

Then you would have to have quite a lot of people in the Free Cities who seen them... and who may get suspicious. Not all of them can be on the conspiracy. 

They moved around a lot and kids grow fast--and change fast as they grow. Especially very little kids, as Dany would have been one way or another. Lots of ways for them to get past recognitions.

10 minutes ago, Runaway Penguin said:

As for "someone else's role" in the Lyanna affair, I do not think there needs to be a third party in the eloping/abduction/whatever.

No--doesn't need to be. But there still might have been. As there was Baelish running mastermind behind the Jon Arryn stuff with the Lannisters non the wiser.

10 minutes ago, Runaway Penguin said:

But who gave Brandon Stark the bright idea to go to King's Landing and demand combat? And maybe even someone not sending Rhaegar correct info to his retreat. Someone who he would trust... Tywin's Pycelle?

YUP! Or, could be someone Brandon saw as a pure enemy--look at Jon's reaction to the pink letter. No reason to trust Ramsay, but it's enough provocation that Jon's going straight to Winterfell--at least until he runs into all of the knives.

10 minutes ago, Runaway Penguin said:

The biggest mystery with Rhaegar is the long time he did nothing during the war. Was he building strength to cast Aerys down and seize po¨wer himself? Did he go to Trident ony because he knew that he cannot ever negotiate with Robert and he must kill him?

YUP! Given that the World Book tells us Rhaegar wanted his father off of the throne, these are both good ideas.

Another one--Rhaegar and Tywin were in cahoots from the start. Or from close to the start.

Another: the war started and Rhaegar realized he should let it run its course for a while--use the mess to his advantage to get Devil Daddy off the throne. 

[nanother]

I'm late to the party, hoping for another edition of this thread, lol. I was going to do a comprehensive evaluation of all theories, or at least the top few (in terms of my gut feeling as to how likely they are), but I realised I should re-read at least parts of the essays, so that's not going to happen now. I'll just say that the top 2 for me are the Rhaegar and Arthur ones.

Some things I tend to think about when considering these parentage theories:

1. The practically universal belief that Rhaegar carried Lyanna off either to rape her or because he loved her (or both - some people have very strange ideas of 'love'). The Targaryen version is love, the (official) Stark/Baratheon version is rape, the Lannister version is unspecified romantic/sexual involvement. Yes, there's a strong possibility that the "kidnapping" had nothing to do with love or sex, or that Rhaegar was framed altogether, but, as much as I hope for some version of "Tywin framed Rhaegar", it's very odd that no-one expresses any doubt about this love/rape story, ever. Not his family, not Barristan, not Jaime, not Jon Connington, all of whom were in the position to either be in on Rhaegar's plan, or to be aware if Rhaegar made an attempt to deny these charges (and I can't see how Rhaegar could have not known that he's being accused of kidnapping Lya, and can't see him just shrugging it off if he's accused falsely). I don't think we ever got the Dornish view, I guess it might shed too much light on the matter. In any case, Aerys blackmailing the Martells with Elia vaguely points to there being some sort of (expected?) animosity from the Dornish. So Aerys likely either believed the kidnapping or he was the one framing Rhaegar (or Varys was messing with him). Now, if Aerys  was the one behind the kidnapping (with or without Varys pulling his strings), then I can see Rhaegar not trying to clear his (own) name.

2. The blue winter roses. Lyanna's relationship with them seems very visceral (literally, even) and emotional. We have visions of Lyanna with a garland of winter roses weeping blood. Or wearing a crown of winter roses and a gown spattered with gore. We have that odd pause in Ned's saying "Lyanna was ... fond of flowers". The death-blue petals in the ToJ dream and the black petals spilling from Lyanna's hand in the room smelling of blood and roses. Maybe I'm missing some. In any case, it's all very intense. So explanations like "well, Rhaegar gave it to her for some political reason, or as an insult, then someone capitalised on it and framed Rhaegar for kidnapping" sound a little anticlimatic. Not impossible, but I'd favour interpretations that match the gravity of these dreams better.

Also, as rightly pointed out, winter roses seem to have a strong association with insults and deceit. What does it say about Lyanna that she loved the scent of them? From that brief memory of Ned, she comes across as assertive and down-to-earth. So did she maybe let herself to be deceived for whatever reason, or ??

3. Ashara's role and the Stark-Dayne relations. We have so little information, but this issue keeps coming back. What's up with the Daynes?

4. All those little oddities that don't quite add up. Too tired to go into this now.

 

[Sly Wren]

@SFDanny: I'm realizing I've dragged you into a tangent that may not fit on this thread.

So, I'm putting this in a spoiler just in case it's too far afield. Might be I should move all this to another thread.

So, to begin:

29 minutes ago, SFDanny said:

How then does this touch on the truth of Dany's account? It doesn't call it into question. It just goes along with Daenerys's view of her brother that he has an overinflated sense of his importance. So, if anything, this tends to support Dany's view of her world as more trustworthy on the subject than her brother's. Not exactly a surprise.

Not touch on the truth of Dany's account. Touches on the truth of all that Viserys has told her. Which is what she bases her Rhaegar/Lyanna daydreams on.

20 minutes ago, SFDanny said:

Why were the Targaryens put out of the house with the red door? Because of a change in who was the Sealord perhaps?

But Dany says it's because Darry died. And I assume she got the "Darry died" account from Viserys. Nothing about this.

20 minutes ago, SFDanny said:

We have a document signed by Ser Willem Darry, Prince Oberyn, and the Sealord of Braavos, so we know the Sealord involved himself in a secret pact that held, not only the fate of the Targaryens, but that of Dorne as well, in the balance. I don't think we can argue this is a fake, with the high price Prince Doran places on the execution of the agreement. He pledges his daughter and heir to Viserys, for gods sake. So, why would we doubt the pact was signed in Braavos? I don't think we should.

No--can't see a reason to doubt that happened in some way or another.

22 minutes ago, SFDanny said:

Regarding, Ser Willem's health and his "smooth hands," this is an amazing use of the banal to manufacture clues. People get old. People get sick. People die of sickness. People who work with their hands develop hard hands; when they stop using their hands for work as they get older their hands get smoother. None of this is evidence the man in question is not Ser Willem Darry.

No--but all of the above happened REALLY fast if Dany's Darry is the same master at arms Jaime remembers. And who was sent to Dragonstone. 

22 minutes ago, SFDanny said:

Certainly, Prince Oberyn knows who Darry was. His signature tells us that Dorne knew who they were dealing with in Braavos.

True--but the man Dany remembers could still not be Darry. Viserys was with the original Darry. Dany was with someone else.

24 minutes ago, SFDanny said:

So, my response, Sly Wren, is that not only are these things not proof of anything, they aren't clues that anything is other than what we know. Certainly, there are details we would like to know, but the broad strokes of the "evidence" is what the pact tells us. And that corroborates Dany's tale of the house with the red door in Braavos.

On the bolded: agreed.

On the clues? They are reasons to question. Especially Viserys getting info blatantly wrong--like people chasing him. As you say, it shows his own deluded self-importance. And he's the one teaching Dany the Targ history and interps of it. Lots of reason to question his "take" on the past.

[Kingmonkey]

4 hours ago, Voice said:

We know Lyanna did not approve of Robert's promiscuity, and that she used it as a means to pass a very reasonable judgement, predicting that he would not remain faithful.

Rhaegar's abduction or courtship of a fourteen-fifteen year old girl, that leaves said girl dead in a bed of blood, with or without a baby, is not "keeping to one bed."

You miss a very important word here: "never". 

Ned points out to Lyanna that what happened before their betrothal does not matter, only what will happen afterwards. Lyanna's response is not to disagree with that, but to say that love will not change a man's nature; Robert will, she believes, continue to be unfaithful.

If what Robert did beforehand is not relevant, then nor is what Rhaegar did beforehand. It is only what comes after that is relevant. Lyanna believes that even after the betrothal, Robert will not be faithful to her. 

If we apply the same standard that Lyanna applies to Robert here to Rhaegar, then we must assume that Lyanna did not mind what had happened before, so long as she felt assured that it would not continue to happen again. Robert's nature, Lyanna tells us, will not change. His nature is to sleep around. He is a man who frequents brothels. Rhaegar is not. That is not Rhaegar's nature, and therefore Lyanna's objections simply do not apply to Rhaegar.

Yes, it's apples and oranges. The problem with Rhaegar is that in the past he slept with another woman. Lyanna never objects to that. Her problem is that Robert will continue to sleep with other women, regardless of love, not that he had slept with women in the past.

4 hours ago, Voice said:

I didn't bring it up. Only commented on the conversation at hand.

My sincere apologies for giving you the impression that complaint was aimed at you. While we disagree about a host of things, I have nothing but respect for you as a debating partner. 

I wrote that out of frustration that in this thread where we are supposed to be analysing the essays written in this exercise to question Jon's parentage, the only responses to the RLJ hypothesis have entirely ignored the RLJ essay and picked what might be deemed easy targets to attack, ones that aren't even part of the argument put forwards.

I was enthusiastic about joining this project as someone who entirely agrees that the heretical views have frequently been short-changed by the orthodoxy. It was supposed to be about treating all the options equally. I have frequently argued in defence of heretical views I don't agree with in the RLJ threads when I see them being treated disrespectfully and with a lack of intellectual honesty. No surprise then that I'm disappointed when, given the opportunity for the alternatives to stand on equal footing, I see a similar lack of respect and intellectual honesty being reflected on the RLJ argument. 

 

 

[Kingmonkey]

@Sly Wren @SFDanny @Little Scribe of Naath @Runaway Penguin et al;

The Dany question is an interesting one and worthy of proper debate, but a side issue to the XYJ wrap-up. I'd love to get into this -- shall we start a separate thread for it?

[Little Scribe of Naath]

Yeah, go ahead, @Kingmonkey!

 

[J. Stargaryen]

5 hours ago, Voice said:

You do realize this is the one and only paragraph of direct quotation from Lyanna Stark, aside from "Promise me" and screaming "Eddard!"

It shows the "iron underneath" imo, but all some people seem to be able to see is her beauty.

So if you seriously want to suggest that passage was included to demonstrate that dearly departed Lyanna was a hypocrite, all I can do is wish you well.

I don't recall saying that.

For the record, I completely support @Kingmonkey's take on the issue-- "apples and oranges." But even if you don't, there's still the possibility that was Lyanna turned out to be a hypocrite. I don't see how that can be ruled out. That's all I meant. Though, in case it's not clear, I believe KM's take means that she wasn't.

 

[wolfmaid7]

On 9/11/2016 at 3:29 PM, Kingmonkey said:

Maybe ignorance, maybe a correct judgement of character; we'll never know. 

Yep, happy to agree to disagree on this one. As I already said, I agree with you that this doesn't preclude the possibility of Lyanna and Robert having had sex. People can change their minds on these things. It's a point against Robert, but far from conclusive.

However it's still not a point against Rhaegar, because Rhaegar was not like Robert

Still don't see it as a point for or against Robert or Rhaegar because we don't know in what context Ned was speaking. I get a very different inflection from Ned's

"For the first time in years, he found himself remembering Rhaegar Targaryen. He wondered if Rhaegar had frequented brothels; somehow he thought not."

On 9/11/2016 at 3:29 PM, Kingmonkey said:

"Mine again," indeed. Lyanna used to be his. His betrothed. The possessive doesn't have to mean any more than that. What do you make of Robert's "Yet somehow he still won. He has Lyanna now..."?

Kingmonkey,i have to disagree with you.Lyanna "was still" his bethrothed until she died.Was the contract of marriage null  and void because she was missing? No it wasn't.He isn't talking about that at all.

What's Robert belief? He like everyone else believed that Rhaegar took her because he had some romantice designs on her.He has Lyanna now in death where he never had her before in life to do with whatever he liked.Adding to this is Robert's death bed statement to Ned. " He will give Lyanna Ned's love." So he believes that they are going to be reunited.

On 9/11/2016 at 3:29 PM, Kingmonkey said:

 

If we consider the story of Harrenhal, where Robert is too busy with his drinking buddies to pay any attention (that we know of) to Lyanna, we should consider the possibility that Robert just wasn't that into Lyanna at the time. That he was happy enough with her, but that it was the fact that he lost her that made her so precious to him in memory, not what he actually had when she was still around. Robert is very clearly portrayed as a romantic. He wants everything to be epic, he dreams of an idyllic life as a wandering knight without having to worry about the concerns of the real world. Even his casual sex is not so casual -- he would "swear undying love and forget them before evenfall."

Robert had Lyanna taken from him, and it's easy to see how he would be more passionate about her after the fact than he ever was before. Is it really a "lover's loss" he is displaying, or rather the loss of an idyllic past that never was? He was supposed to have Lyanna, but instead he's stuck with Cersei. 15 years of Cersei were probably 15 years of romanticising what might have been. 

Perception and associating perception with wording is everything,and yours i thing is based off the idea that Robert " was too busy" to pay attention.Why couldn't they be comfortable and confident enough with each other to not be clingy at a party.That one moment in time you see as Robert being to busy to pay Lyanna attention,could be an extention of  Lyanna and Robert at that point in time being secure in themselves as a couple.

 

On 9/11/2016 at 3:29 PM, Kingmonkey said:

What "fallback" go to response? Who here has gone to that response? I haven't seen anyone say that. I've given a pretty complete answer to this which entirely contrary to your suggestion points out that there is no hypocrisy because  what Lyanna objects to for Robert does not apply to Rhaegar. If you want to argue it, then argue it. Don't make up alternative explanations to respond to purely because they're easier to answer

Umm Jstar in response to Voice of the first men said "Do as i say not as i do" to Lyanna going with Rhaegar who as Voice puts it wouldn't be keeping to one bed.And if Rhaegar dumps his wife because she can't give him a child he's just a douche.

I fail to see how i introduced a Straw man there? You posit the wrong question that Ned's thought was a comparioson between Rhaegar and Robert.It wasn't.Littlefinger may have been sarcastic but that sarcasm is what triggered Ned's callback to Rhaegar.A blabber mouth who for a fleeting moment Ned wondered ever visited brothals lest anything slip...That was followed by medival version of "Nahhh"

On 9/11/2016 at 3:37 PM, Kingmonkey said:

Well yes, Rhaegar wasn't like Robert. Ned specifically makes that point in the context of the very thing that Lyanna had complained to him about Robert. As part of the same thought process where he remembers Lyanna's objection to Robert's bed-hopping, he thinks of Rhaegar as being different to Robert in that respect.

I honestly have no idea what you're trying to say here, sorry. 

No, it was kind of a joke but no really kind of a thing.But i disgree with you...Ned wasn't doing a comparison between Rhaegar and Robert i really think you all may have read that scene wrong.It was an idle thought to a trigger.

 

11 hours ago, SFDanny said:

I think if you read the quote in context it is clear that Daenerys believes in the particular instance of her brother, Rhaegar, running off with his "northern girl" that he is motivated by love to rescue her from a marriage she does't want. Is it just a story? Yes, she isn't an eye witness to the "kidnapping" but stories have origins and the fact one side tells us one thing and the other tells us something else, should tell the reader something. When they tell us the same thing it also tells us something. Like there is no one in story who believes anything other than what is said - Rhaegar took Lyanna away.

Of course most of that isn't the point of my post. The point is the context in which Daenerys invokes Rhaegar's example is one of an impending marriage she does not want. She wants Daario to rescue her, just as she thinks Rhaegar did with Lyanna. An observant reader should note that this is the first time this event is put in the context of a rescue or and escape from a impending marriage, instead of a kidnapping or alternatively the running away of lovers.

As to JNR comments you should read my subsequent post on the subject because much of what he talks about has nothing to do with what I believe. It was a misunderstood joke.

I did read it in context and agree stor does have origins.This one starts with Rhaegar crowning Lyanna QOLAB over his wife.That followed by the rumor that he ran off with her because they "went missing at the same time" is fruit of the poison tree.The whole bride stealing has cultural meaning here.This has happened before in Westeros and romance was always seen as the culprit.What Dany thinks is a desire superimposed on an event to which she doesn't have the information.However, her conversation with Selmy proves that she doesn't know beyond what everyone thinks which by the way is also based off a colored view of Rhaegar.

"That they went missing at the same time" is the problem.No one believed Rhaegar kidnapped her because its Rhaegar women would be lining up to have him kidnapp them.He doesn't need to because any woman would have wanted him.So in their eyes that's a BS story so they had to have run off together.

However, Robert absolutely believes Rhaegar kidnapped her because he probably knows that Lyanna wouldn't run off with him.So we are back to. There's no way Rhaegar kidnapped her because

1.Any woman would want him and he didn't need to so its obvious they ran off together

On Robert's end he had to have kidnapped her because

2. He knows abosultely believes Lyanna would not run off with him....I wonder why?

Option 3 but schools of thoughts are wrong. Rhaegar didn't run off with her and didn't kidnapp her because he had nothing to do with her disappearence and he just was made the scapegoat.

Dany thinking Rhaegar ran off with Lyanna is as fanciful as Robert thinking he kidnapped her and raped her.Both not thinking of the one that seems a shock.

Either or is against Rhaegar's..No one thinks he just didn't do it,none of it.So,this event is put in that context because it couldn't be put in any other context by Dany.Again she was upset at first thining why Rhaegar would ave run off with another man's bethothed.So she knows nothing.The observant reader would pay close attention to the usage of the unreliable narrator which Dany is. 

 

[wolfmaid7]

2 hours ago, Kingmonkey said:

@Sly Wren @SFDanny @Little Scribe of Naath @Runaway Penguin et al;

The Dany question is an interesting one and worthy of proper debate, but a side issue to the XYJ wrap-up. I'd love to get into this -- shall we start a separate thread for it?

Cool with me.

[wolfmaid7]

1 hour ago, J. Stargaryen said:

I don't recall saying that.

For the record, I completely support @Kingmonkey's take on the issue-- "apples and oranges." But even if you don't, there's still the possibility that was Lyanna turned out to be a hypocrite. I don't see how that can be ruled out. That's all I meant. Though, in case it's not clear, I believe KM's take means that she wasn't.

 

You implied that with your " do as i say,not as i do"statement in reply to the question that Lyanna would have basically done the same thing with Rhaegar. He wouldn't be keeping to one bed. And there's no indication whatsoever that Rhaegar was going to put away Elia.

Which would be very distasteful in itself.

Or out of sheer coincidence your reply just landed in a spot of the conversation that made it look that way?

Either way i don't think its "apples and oranges" Infidelity is infidelity and that's exactly what would have been going on.

I will say if this is true not only is Lyanna a hyprocrite Rhaegar's characteristic of being dutiful,honorable and intelligent is total BS.

[J. Stargaryen]

1 minute ago, wolfmaid7 said:

You implied that with your " do as i say,not as i do"statement in reply to the question that Lyanna would have basically done the same thing with Rhaegar. He wouldn't be keeping to one bed. And there's no indication whatsoever that Rhaegar was going to put away Elia.

Which would be very distasteful in itself.

My understanding of the conversation was that Voice was saying Lyanna wouldn't object to Robert bed hopping and then hop into bed with Rhaegar. That it didn't make sense. @Voice can correct me if I am mistaken. I was simply pointing out that, even if you reject KM's take, you can't rule out the possibility that Lyanna was a hypocrite. In other words, there are multiple ways in which it would make sense for Lyanna to utter those words and then run off with Rhaegar.