Jon was born a bastard and remains a bastard.

[The Weirwoods Eyes]

15 minutes ago, King Ned Stark said:

The fact that polygamy is rare is a clue in and of itself, to me.  Kind of like the out-of-nowhere Beric resurrection, by a largely unfaithful priest.  Martin seems keen on laying down precedents, so later surprises don't seem so far fetched.  If the majority of Targ kings had multiple wives, then everyone would assume Rhaegar would.  Making it rare, hides it in plain sight.

Regarding the KG, I think Hightower is the key, as it seems fairly clear that Whent and Dayne were firmly with Rhaegar, in for a penny, in for a pound.  I think Rhaegar managed to swing HT to his side, as Gerold was unhappy with Aerys, but as Jaime said, "That's the Old Bull, loyal to the end and a better man than me, all agree".  Maybe that's a clue as well, that they both turned on their king, but Jaime did so in a violent way, but Hightower only acquiesced after hearing Rhaegar's plan for a peaceful transition; a la Maximus in Gladiator.  Once he had command and loyalty of the army, he could march in and plant whomever he wanted on the throne.

Getting back to the precedent thing, I think Robert keeping Barry in for his will, and then Ned having him read the will is important.  It's let's us know that the Lord Commander of the KG has authority and is entrusted with kings wills and decrees.  On a personal, tinfoily, note, I think Hightower was sent with Aerys's decree legitimizing Rhaegar's second marriage, in a trade off for putting down the rebellion. I think Rhaegar was in communication with Aerys (and Tywin, who was unresponsive) for sometime, hence Aerys running through multiple Hands' of the King.  And why Rhaegar left Jaime as a hostage against Tywin.

 

I'm in agreement, other than Hightower. I don't think he was swung to backing Rhaegar's usurpation of his father's crown. I think that once Aerys was dead he saw Rhaegars last living son as his new King, and shifted his allegiance duly. 

I've long argued for communications between Aerys & Rhaegar during the rebellion. After all the man knew where to send Hightower for goodness sake!

 

13 minutes ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

I think Rhaegar DID plot to overthrow Aerys - but peacefully. He stated as much to someone about the changes that would be forthcoming after some Great Council after the War, if I recall correctly.

And I think key members of the Kingsguard - the three at the Tower specifically - had sided with him in this plot. To them, he was already their King.

 

 

He told Jaime upon his return to KL to watch over his wife & children, and that his father needed him as his crutch so he could not come to the Trident. But that changes would be made upon his return. Changes he'd long meant to implement. I'm paraphrasing but that's the gist. 

[The Weirwoods Eyes]

One of the main things I think people who argue against Polygamy are neglecting is that if a wedding happened and people can attest to that then it happened. Even if no one but R+L know it happened and Jon never learns of it he still is not a bastard. A marriage is a marriage and there is no precedent whatsoever in Westeros for polygamous wives not being seen as and going down in history as actual wives. Even when they are the cause of/ major factor in a civil war! 

The point made by I think it was @Ygrain or possibly @Lady Blizzardborn that if anyone ever did so it would delegitimize the entire Targaryen line. And likewise we see even outside of this rather major factor elsewhere in Westeros across all cultures all wives are wives regardless of the communities feelings about Polygamy. So the pertinent thing to ask is, if a marriage happened and can be attested to Jon is legitimate and it comes down to who wishes to declare for him and what power he and his backers can wield. 

Frankly, the HS at the time of said theoretical marriages deceased opinion on the matter is irrelevant. 

We've moved well beyond his opinion, indeed he's dead in the ground some years now. The opinions that matter are the opinions of the Lords & Ladies of Westeros, Daenerys, and Jon himself. The HS can go jump too because the chances of him making it alive to the end of winds are about as slim as dental floss.

 And if a marriage can be sworn to by witnesses then Dany has to accept it, whether she knew already as I suggested may be the case or not, because to deny it means she delegitimises herself as well. Being descended as she is from a second wife. 

Likewise, the opinions of the Lords & Ladies of the realm 17/18 years ago are also no longer relevant as it is only the opinions of themselves and their successors now that matters. Men who might have dismissed Rhaegars second marriage at the time may now cling to it like a life raft rather than accept a female ruler. Those that supported or may have, had they known it back then, may now feel it should be dismissed because Daenerys comes with Dragons. But there is a bind; dismissingJon's legitimacy due to polygamy dismisses Dany's and fAegon's too as they both descend or supposedly do from Rhaenys. 

[Ygrain]

4 hours ago, Rippounet said:

What makes you say they have to be different?
It's a rhetorical question. I'm just pointing out that for the KG's presence to be meaningful you need to start making assumptions, speculations, or interpret the text in a very specific way, which completely invalidates the meaningfulness of the presence that is supposed to be there in the first place.
Or to put it differently, the KG's presence would be meaningful if the whole ToJ thing took place long after the Sack. But the chronology doesn't really allow for that or else you begin having other much bigger problems.
The real reason why you believe there are two sets of reasons is because you are starting from the conclusion and not from the facts.

The fact is that Rhaegar left ToJ while there were four more KG at Aerys' disposal. The fact is that at the time of the ToJ showdown, there are zero KG at Viserys' disposal. The fact is that GRRM stated that the KG would take orders from Rhaegar, and the fact is that when the KG reply to Ned's "why are you here", they invoke their vows and status as KG, not orders. Up till the Sack (plus the time necessary for them to find out), Rhaegar's orders along the lines "stay and guard Lyanna" is enough to keep them there. After the Sack, with no more KG available, the three are in dereliction of their primary duty to protect the King, unless the King is right there in the tower. There is nothing circular about this discrepancy in their duties and behaviour.

4 hours ago, Rippounet said:

This doesn't address my point. I'm asking you how is it honourable to start a fight to the death without explaining it. Your reasoning here is actually circular.

For one, the dream doesn't necessarily cover the entirety of the conversation. Plus, Ned's assessment of the KG's honour comes ex post.

33 minutes ago, King Ned Stark said:

Getting back to the precedent thing, I think Robert keeping Barry in for his will, and then Ned having him read the will is important.  It's let's us know that the Lord Commander of the KG has authority and is entrusted with kings wills and decrees.  On a personal, tinfoily, note, I think Hightower was sent with Aerys's decree legitimizing Rhaegar's second marriage, in a trade off for putting down the rebellion.

That's, IMHO, a very likely scenario.

30 minutes ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

I think Rhaegar DID plot to overthrow Aerys - but peacefully. He stated as much to someone about the changes that would be forthcoming after some Great Council after the War, if I recall correctly.

And I think key members of the Kingsguard - the three at the Tower specifically - had sided with him in this plot. To them, he was already their King.

Not Hightower, who is depicted as showing blind obedience to Aerys. I don't think it is coincidental that it is him who talk about Aerys still sitting the IT, had they been at KL.

[King Ned Stark]

1 hour ago, The Weirwoods Eyes said:

One of the main things I think people who argue against Polygamy are neglecting is that if a wedding happened and people can attest to that then it happened. Even if no one but R+L know it happened and Jon never learns of it he still is not a bastard. A marriage is a marriage and there is no precedent whatsoever in Westeros for polygamous wives not being seen as and going down in history as actual wives. Even when they are the cause of/ major factor in a civil war! 

The point made by I think it was @Ygrain or possibly @Lady Blizzardborn that if anyone ever did so it would delegitimize the entire Targaryen line. And likewise we see even outside of this rather major factor elsewhere in Westeros across all cultures all wives are wives regardless of the communities feelings about Polygamy. So the pertinent thing to ask is, if a marriage happened and can be attested to Jon is legitimate and it comes down to who wishes to declare for him and what power he and his backers can wield. 

Frankly, the HS at the time of said theoretical marriages deceased opinion on the matter is irrelevant. 

We've moved well beyond his opinion, indeed he's dead in the ground some years now. The opinions that matter are the opinions of the Lords & Ladies of Westeros, Daenerys, and Jon himself. The HS can go jump too because the chances of him making it alive to the end of winds are about as slim as dental floss.

 And if a marriage can be sworn to by witnesses then Dany has to accept it, whether she knew already as I suggested may be the case or not, because to deny it means she delegitimises herself as well. Being descended as she is from a second wife. 

Likewise, the opinions of the Lords & Ladies of the realm 17/18 years ago are also no longer relevant as it is only the opinions of themselves and their successors now that matters. Men who might have dismissed Rhaegars second marriage at the time may now cling to it like a life raft rather than accept a female ruler. Those that supported or may have, had they known it back then, may now feel it should be dismissed because Daenerys comes with Dragons. But there is a bind; dismissingJon's legitimacy due to polygamy dismisses Dany's and fAegon's too as they both descend or supposedly do from Rhaenys. 

That's really clever.  If Jon is the legitimate son of a second wife, it puts Danny's heart in conflict.  Is she doing what is right, or just for power like the others vying for the throne.

 

[The Weirwoods Eyes]

Exactly, and by declaring his claim illegitimate she also declares her own null.  Total bind. I think that is deliberate, that Rhaeny's offspring is the line the Targaryen throne took. 

[Ygrain]

Yeah, that was me :-) While polygamy may be against the customs and beliefs of the majority of Westeros, the Targs definitely never passed a law against it, or else their own legitimacy would have been undermined

[The Weirwoods Eyes]

2 minutes ago, Ygrain said:

Yeah, that was me :-) While polygamy may be against the customs and beliefs of the majority of Westeros, the Targs definitely never passed a law against it, or else their own legitimacy would have been undermined

 

I couldn't remember which of you had said it. 

But basically it is a fundamental truth and there is no sidestepping the fact polygamy is not, has not nor ever can be whilst a Targaryen sits or aspires to sit the iron throne ever be declared "illegal" 

Not that all laws in a pseudo-medieval society are in anyway binding anyway. As I said above the rules are what those with the power say they are depending upon what suits them at the time. 

[The Twinslayer]

2 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

<some snipping for length>

Polygamy was never an accepted practice in Westeros. Some First Men kings got away with it, and it was ignored in one Targaryen king - Aegon I - because he conquered the continent and married before his conquest. In Maegor's case the people constantly rebelled against his rule and eventually deposed him, his many marriages being one reason to do so. But Rhaegar wasn't a king, and unlike Prince Maegor he didn't even have a dragon. And even in Maegor's case - Aenys I, the Faith, and the entire Realm didn't give a damn about the fact that he was the rider of the largest dragon alive. They forced him into exile. A less forgiving king than Aenys I would have taken Maegor's head for this kind of thing.

Yeah, that is circular reasoning. If you presuppose the following points:

1. There is a very fixed line of succession demanding that the eldest surviving son of the eldest becomes the king (which has been scrapped by TWoIaF)

2. Everyone upholds and follows that succession as if it was holy scripture (which has been scrapped by TWoIaF).

3. Kings become kings immediately after their predecessors die, and not through rituals of state like proclamations, coronations, and anointments (we know the Kingsguard do not make kings).

I agree with basically all of this and will just add a few thoughts.  

There is one more big differences between Aegon/Rhaenys/Visenya (who got away with polygamy) and Maegor (who did not).  Aegon/Rhaenys/Visenya ALL had dragons, while none of Maegor's wives did.  Who is going to say to a dragonrider who claims to be a queen that in reality she is just a royal mistress?  

This is reinforced by the way polygamy is introduced in the novels.  The first mention is by Jorah, who tells Dany that she can take two husbands when the context is the same as Aegon's:  the marriages will take place outside of Westeros and all three of the marriage partners are going to be dragonriders.    

And there is an important difference between Aegon I and Rhaegar.  Rhaegar's marriage to Elia was performed in the Faith, which requires a vow of monogamy.  The Faith might recognize the validity of a first marriage conducted in the Valyrian custom or before a tree.  But after conducting Rhaegar's marriage to Elia in a sept, the Faith would never recognize the validity of a second marriage that violated the vows taken in the sept, or the legitimacy of a child born of that "marriage."    

And Rhaegar was a scholar.  He would have known about the problems caused by Maegor's polygamy and by Targaryen kings having legitmate (or legitimized) children from two different noble houses.  But he also would have known that virtually every other Prince of Dragonstone before him freely took mistresses with no negative consequences.  Why would he invite the kind of trouble caused by Maegor's polygamy and Aegon IV's decision to legitimize Daemon Blackfyre?  That makes no sense.

On your #1-3, I agree that TWOIAF confirms that the line of succession between the king's grandson and his son is not fixed.  But we already knew that when we learned in ACOK that a Great Council chose Egg over Prince Maegor.  That told us that there was precedent for the king's younger son to inherit, and that the kingship does not pass automatically by primogeniture upon the death of the prior king -- when there is doubt, the Iron Throne remains vacant until the new king is chosen.  

2 hours ago, The Weirwoods Eyes said:

<also snipped> 

One person who may know a bit more about what happened is Daenerys for a start. In Dance; as she travels to her wedding with Hizdhar she muses upon Daario. And thinks that if he truly loved her he would carry her off at swordpoint, as Rhaegar had done with his northern girl. 

Now, How does Dany know Rhaegar carried Lyanna off at sword point because he truly loved her? And why is it on the way to a wedding that she must go through with for duty that she thinks on this? 

Someone has to have told Dany the story of Rhaegar & Lyanna and my guess is Darry, because I doubt 7-year-old Viserys was in the know to a great extent as to his brother's motives and actions. But why would the old sword master know them? My guess he learnt of them from Rhaella. because if you had been hiding out for the best part of a year you would go see your mum when you returned, and mum would have a few questions about what the fuck you thought you were doing?  So we have to ask, what does Daenerys know that she doesn't yet really understand is important? She might know Rhaegar married Lyanna. So when she meets Jon and learns whose son he is the question of legitimacy is null and void. She damn well knows he is legitimate?

Or Barristan, he travelled to the Trident with Rhaegar, and would have rode alongside him the entire way as his KG. What might have passed between the Prince and the man who had guarded him his whole life. Barristan joined the KG the year Rhaegar was born.  that's a hellava bond to have with a man, he's seen him grow, watched him learn to walk, ride, fight and Rhaegar would have a relationship with him. Might he have told him that he truly loved his second wife. But not have mentioned the babe in her womb?

Connington may have witnessed a wedding but think nothing of Lyanna's child because he had returned to KL and then fled never knowing she carried a child. Or maybe Connington wasn't even of the 6 Rhaegar took to the RL?  maybe he didn't see a wedding but knew Rhaegar's motivations and feelings regarding Lyanna?  

As to Whent, Dayne and Hightower. It is pretty obvious that they felt they were defending their King. At least to those who are open to Jon being legitimate. I suspect Hightower the stickler for the rules and fiercely loyal to the Targaryen kings actually "crowned" the babe already and that is why they had not fled to DS to protect Viserys & Rhaela.  

I don't agree with this.  The person who told Dany the fairy-tale version of Rhaegar and Lyanna was Viserys.  "Yet sometimes Dany would picture the way it had been, so often had her brother told her the stories.  The midnight flight to Dragonstone, moonlight shimmering on the ship's black sails.  Her brother Rhaegar battling the Usurper in the bloody waters of the Trident and dying for the woman he loved.  The sack of King's Landing by the ones Viserys called the Usurper's dogs, the lords Lannister and Stark."  It is only later that we learn that Viserys is wrong:  that is, when Ned tells us that Robert "avenged" Lyanna at the Trident and that he (Ned) did not participate in the Sack, and when Jaime tells us that Rhaella and Viserys fled during the day time rather than at night.

And we know that Connington was probably with Rhaegar when Rhaegar took Lyanna but we also know that Connington not only did not witness a Rhaegar-Lyanna wedding, he believes that it did not happen.  We know this from his POV in ADWD when he remembers Rhaegar's wedding (only one) and points out that Aegon/Young Griff that it would be impossible for Aegon/Young Griff to take more than one wife.  There is no way GRRM would have included that in Connington's POV if it had ever remotely occured to Connington that Rhaegar would have tried to do such a thing.    

And I don't believe there is any way Hightower would have "crowned" Lyanna's baby.  Jaime and Barristan tell us that the worst KG are the ones who play the game of thrones, and Jaime says that Criston Cole (the "Kingmaker") was one of the worst KG ever.  I don't think Hightower would want to go down in history as a new Criston Cole any more than Rhaegar would want to be seen as a new Maegor the Cruel.  

[The Twinslayer]

37 minutes ago, Ygrain said:

Yeah, that was me :-) While polygamy may be against the customs and beliefs of the majority of Westeros, the Targs definitely never passed a law against it, or else their own legitimacy would have been undermined

 

32 minutes ago, The Weirwoods Eyes said:

I couldn't remember which of you had said it. 

But basically it is a fundamental truth and there is no sidestepping the fact polygamy is not, has not nor ever can be whilst a Targaryen sits or aspires to sit the iron throne ever be declared "illegal" 

Not that all laws in a pseudo-medieval society are in anyway binding anyway. As I said above the rules are what those with the power say they are depending upon what suits them at the time. 

It would be pretty easy to pass a law saying:  (1) the marriages of Aegon I are ratified and the offspring of those marriages recognized as legimate, but (2) any future polygamous "marriage" will be a nullity.

The English Act of Settlement of 1701 said that no Roman Catholic could inherit the English throne.  That did not stop George I, and every single subsequent king or queen of England, from claiming the English throne -- even though they all trace their lineage back to a line of Catholic kings.  

[Lord Varys]

3 hours ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

I think Rhaegar DID plot to overthrow Aerys - but peacefully. He stated as much to someone about the changes that would be forthcoming after some Great Council after the War, if I recall correctly.

It seems Rhaegar was pretty much already in charge by the time he rode to the Trident. He made the decisions which KG would accompany him, not Aerys or the Hand. That tells us pretty much. I doubt Rhaegar had any intention to depose his father, though. A regency with himself as Prince Regent would have worked just fine. That would have been much better than to set a precedent for the deposition of an anointed king (which would essentially threaten the very powerbase of the monarchy itself).

But the rumors we have about the planned informal Great Council at Harrenhal talk about either a regency or a forced abdication.

Quote

And I think key members of the Kingsguard - the three at the Tower specifically - had sided with him in this plot. To them, he was already their King.

If you take the fever dream as evidence then at least one of them - Ser Gerold - gives ample evidence that he would have given his life to defend Aerys II. However, establishing a regency in the name of a indisposed king doesn't threaten his life. Aegon II was also confined to his bedchamber after he nearly died at Rook's Rest, resulting in Prince Aemond ruling the Realm in his stead. Rhaegar taking power in Aerys' name would not necessarily have meant or resulted in the death of the old man. In that sense at least some Kingsguard might have supported him in that, possibly even Hightower included. Although Darry and Selmy seem to have been Aerys' men.

3 hours ago, King Ned Stark said:

The fact that polygamy is rare is a clue in and of itself, to me.  Kind of like the out-of-nowhere Beric resurrection, by a largely unfaithful priest.  Martin seems keen on laying down precedents, so later surprises don't seem so far fetched.  If the majority of Targ kings had multiple wives, then everyone would assume Rhaegar would.  Making it rare, hides it in plain sight.

The polygamy thing may also be a hint towards one of the main characters of the series, Daenerys, taking more than one consort at the same time. The Lyanna thing is important background stuff but the things our actual protagonists are doing are much more important.

2 hours ago, The Weirwoods Eyes said:

I actually have to agree with @Lord Varys in that I have long suspected that certain people know far more about the situation regarding Rhaegar & Lyanna than we are led to believe upon our initial reading.

If you think about it, that's pretty self-evident. Just ask yourself what the public at large would think if Joffrey and Sandor had disappeared for a year or so, abducting a girl in the process. People would have talked about that and the entire Realm would be full of rumors, with the court going essentially insane over this scandal.

The idea that nobody asked, thought, or told rumors about Rhaegar and Lyanna is insane. Many might have not been based on facts but some few certainly would have either made the correct guesses or actually had good information to back them up.

Quote

It is simply absurd to suggest that no one knew anything more than that Rhaegar took Lyanna and no one saw them for a year, then he returned to KL spoke not one word to anyone about her, what they were doing or why etc. Then died taking those secrets to the grave. And Ned just happened to find her at the ToJ. 

It is not just Ned finding the tower, it is also Ser Gerold Hightower finding Rhaegar earlier on. Some people knew or figured out where Rhaegar was, and presumably also what he was doing. Varys would be a key player in all that. We know Aerys was searching for Rhaegar when he exiled Merryweather (and possibly even before that). When he could not be found Connington was named Hand instead of Rhaegar. The person likely in charge of this search for Rhaegar would have been Varys. He would have searched the Realm for rumors and reports about sightings of Rhaegar and Lyanna, etc. And once they had some good information Aerys dispatched Hightower to bring him back.

Quote

I've been saying this for some time and have had no small number of scoffs at the suggestion that anyone knows anything.

If Rhaegar married Lyanna then there is no good reason why he should do this in secret. A secret marriage would defeat any purpose such a marriage could have, especially after he actually abducted Lyanna. It could not be worse than that. And if it was a semi-public or public marriage then everybody would know the truth. As of yet no POV spoke or thought about that because the author does not want his characters to do so.

However, just to clarify: The question whether there was a marriage or not is totally separate from the question whether that marriage is seen as valid by (a majority of) the people of Westeros, King Aerys II, the Faith, or the Starks and Martells. It also has no bearing on whether a child from that union is seen as a royal prince or has a (good) claim to the Iron Throne.

You can - as I do - think it reasonably likely that there was such a marriage and still don't think that this makes Jon a prince, a king, or a person with a good claim to the Iron Throne (he would have some claim since even bastards have weak claims).

Quote

One person who may know a bit more about what happened is Daenerys for a start. In Dance; as she travels to her wedding with Hizdhar she muses upon Daario. And thinks that if he truly loved her he would carry her off at swordpoint, as Rhaegar had done with his northern girl. 

Now, How does Dany know Rhaegar carried Lyanna off at sword point because he truly loved her? And why is it on the way to a wedding that she must go through with for duty that she thinks on this? 

Someone has to have told Dany the story of Rhaegar & Lyanna and my guess is Darry, because I doubt 7-year-old Viserys was in the know to a great extent as to his brother's motives and actions. But why would the old sword master know them? My guess he learnt of them from Rhaella. because if you had been hiding out for the best part of a year you would go see your mum when you returned, and mum would have a few questions about what the fuck you thought you were doing?  So we have to ask, what does Daenerys know that she doesn't yet really understand is important? She might know Rhaegar married Lyanna. So when she meets Jon and learns whose son he is the question of legitimacy is null and void. She damn well knows he is legitimate?

Dany's source could also be Viserys, through Rhaella. It doesn't have to be Darry. Dany remembers Viserys to be her main source on 'their land'. We can be reasonably certain that Rhaegar loved Lyanna and admitted as much to his mother (or she correctly guessed that this was the case). And I'm pretty sure Rhaegar did not deny that he had taken Lyanna as a second wife upon his return to KL. Why would he do that? He is the Prince of Dragonstone, a man of such a high rank that lying about yourself and your deeds would be very unusual. Kings and princes have the privilege to do as they please, they don't have to justify their actions. Prince Duncan and Jaehaerys/Shaera also did not deny the love they felt and that they had taken the spouses they wanted to have.

Quote

Or Barristan, he travelled to the Trident with Rhaegar, and would have rode alongside him the entire way as his KG. What might have passed between the Prince and the man who had guarded him his whole life. Barristan joined the KG the year Rhaegar was born.  that's a hellava bond to have with a man, he's seen him grow, watched him learn to walk, ride, fight and Rhaegar would have a relationship with him. Might he have told him that he truly loved his second wife. But not have mentioned the babe in her womb?

Barristan indicated that he did not have Rhaegar's confidence in ADwD. He wasn't as close to him as Oswell Whent who was involved in the Harrenhal plot. That doesn't make it very likely Rhaegar talked much with Selmy on the way to the Trident. But Selmy certainly would have had access to important information simply because he may have been on guard duty when Rhaegar spoke to Aerys and Rhaella or the council upon his return. Or he could have overheard these people talking about conversations they had with Rhaegar behind close doors.

It is very unlikely that Selmy doesn't know a lot of stuff about the entire Lyanna complex.

Quote

Connington may have witnessed a wedding but think nothing of Lyanna's child because he had returned to KL and then fled never knowing she carried a child. Or maybe Connington wasn't even of the 6 Rhaegar took to the RL?  maybe he didn't see a wedding but knew Rhaegar's motivations and feelings regarding Lyanna?

Considering Jon's feelings for Rhaegar it is very unlikely that he would have been able to suffer being present during Rhaegar's love wedding. He may even have left Rhaegar after it became clear that the man wanted to abduct Lyanna. That could help explain how it came to be that Aerys did not imprison or kill him - he was already back at KL before Rhaegar even abducted Lyanna.

Quote

Who the fuck were those 6? It's highly likely that Dayne & Whent were two of them. But that leaves 4 more people (probably men, but maybe boys if anyone took a squire, and yes I know this is me referencing my own pet theory, but seriously the chances are high they had at least one between them.)   So the remaining 4 know something.

The best guesses are those companions were the men closest to Rhaegar which would be Arthur Dayne, Oswell Whent, Myles Mooton (Rhaegar former squire who died at Stoney Sept), Richard Lonmouth, and Jon Connington. Those are already five men. According to Yandel Lewyn Martell was also very close to Rhaegar before Harrenhal, but one assumes that the Lyanna scandal at Harrenhal changed that. Not to mention that Lewyn should have been more inclined to protect his niece and their children rather than accompanying Rhaegar's weirdo journey.

That would leave the sixth men unaccounted for. Mooton and Connington would eventually have left Rhaegar. Connington perhaps once this Lyanna plan was made, and Mooton may have remained in Maidenpool if that was the place where Rhaegar and Lyanna wed (which is my best guess if there was a (semi-)public wedding, especially since it would provide them with the opportunity to flee by ship) only to then later join Connington's army.

But Lonmouth could have stayed with Rhaegar the entire time, only to return with him to KL after Hightower found him. And then he would, of course, know exactly as much as Rhaegar himself does, making him a very crucial source information on the entire thing.

If Lem Lemoncloak is indeed Richard Lonmouth then the man should better not die before somebody recognizes him and asks him some questions...

Quote

They might have witnessed the union but wisely kept their mouths shut post Robert's victory at the Trident. As Pycelle said. once Rhaegar fell the war was lost. There is no sense in mentioning the fact he left a wife who may or may not have concieved a child by Rhaegar. especially not once Ned returns from the ToJ and says she is dead, with no mention of any children.

If there was a wedding the truth would have come out. People may not talk as much about it because of Robert's obsession with Lyanna and the official story that she was forced into this and raped, etc.

Quote

Jaime Lannister is another one who may know things he doesn't realise are relevant. he was at court he could have heard rumours, Rhaegar might have said things which once the marriage becomes public knowledge he connects the dots on and realises Jon is of their union.

Jaime also must know or suspect some things. That's inevitable.

Quote

As to Whent, Dayne and Hightower. It is pretty obvious that they felt they were defending their King. At least to those who are open to Jon being legitimate. I suspect Hightower the stickler for the rules and fiercely loyal to the Targaryen kings actually "crowned" the babe already and that is why they had not fled to DS to protect Viserys & Rhaela.

That doesn't make any sense for a lot of reasons.

1. The Kingsguard had no right to do such a thing.

2. We have no reason to believe the men at the tower had any intention nor the opportunity to go to Dragonstone. If they were loyal to Rhaegar and his memory then neither of them would have been willing to leave Lyanna and the child.

3. If the knights had as good information on the events on the Trident and the Sack as the fever dream implies (which is questionable) then they would have known that the new king (irregardless whether any of Rhaegar's children yet lived) was Viserys III. The Kingsguard do not make kings. The king does. And Aerys II chose his own son Viserys, and not a son of Rhaegar's.

4. The example of Prince Aegon - the last Targaryen scion through the male line since the death of Viserys III - shows that people do not lightly proclaim and crown a king. Not even people who are fiercely loyal to the Targaryen cause. The idea that three knights in the middle of nowhere would proclaim and crown a king is utterly ridiculous. During the Dance the men in the Green army at Tumbleton could also have proclaimed Prince Daeron the Daring king since it was not clear whether Aegon II was still alive or not, and they eventually learned that Prince Aemond had been killed at the Gods Eye. Daeron was a boy of fifteen years, nearly a man grown, and he was still not proclaimed king by an entire army. Why on earth would the men protecting Lyanna and her child endanger them even more by declaring the child a king? Why would they drive a wedge between House Targaryen itself by doing this? Queen Rhaella had the new king on Dragonstone. Crowning Lyanna's son would put inevitably uncle against nephew, and literally nobody would stand with the infant in such a conflict.

2 hours ago, The Weirwoods Eyes said:

Indeed, or just that When he found Lyanna dead of a fever it was because she had miscarried late into a pregnancy, the dead child festering in her womb. Not all M/C's result in a labour to expel the dead foetus. most do of course but not all.

Or that she caught a fever some other way and died whilst with child.

I have argued repeatedly that Ned must have not just given Robert a pretty good explanation as to what transpired down in the south but also the families of the men who died at his side, not to mention the families of the men he and his buddies killed. Gerold Hightower and Arthur Dayne weren't exactly nbodies - the Whents were in decline after the Rebellion, but if a man like Lord Leyton Hightower inquires about the fate of his uncle you better give a coherent explanation that makes sense.

And the best lies are hidden beneath the truth or remain as close to the truth as possible. So it would be a pretty good way to actually admit that Lyanna had been pregnant and had died in childbirth. The only invention/lie would be to also claim (or imply) that the child died, too. If Ned played it right he would not even have been forced to say it, he could just have implied it, hiding behind his very real tears of grief. It is said that Ned and Robert reconciled over their shared grief for Lyanna, after all.

Quote

I like your idea of a bear faced Ned cradling Jon in his arms whilst he spins a tail for Robert. LMAO. 

Actually, that was one of my feared typos. I think Ned did everything in his power to keep the Lyanna story and his bastard story separate, never taking Jon with him to court but rather have him travel from Starfall to the North by ship. A good way to obscure things would also have been to make Lyanna's child by Rhaegar a girl resembling her father (if the story was about a child being stillborn or one dying shortly after the birth) as well as making Jon Snow younger than he actually is to make it unlikely/impossible for him to be Lyanna's child.

There might be a reason why George included this talk about bastard growing much more quickly than legitimate children. This way an older Jon Snow could actually pass for a child Ned only fathered after his marriage to Catelyn rather late in the war (and even later if the story is that he met this Wylla woman only when he went down south after the Sack and not, say, in the Riverlands shortly before the Trident).

And there are actually some hints that this 'bastard lore' is sort of true. Joffrey is actually a bastard without knowing it and taller than both Robb and Jon despite the fact that he is two years younger. Rhaenyra's three elder sons are strong enough to threaten and severely hurt Aemond despite the fact that he was ten and they vastly younger than he.

13 minutes ago, The Twinslayer said:

I agree with basically all of this and will just add a few thoughts.  

There is one more big differences between Aegon/Rhaenys/Visenya (who got away with polygamy) and Maegor (who did not).  Aegon/Rhaenys/Visenya ALL had dragons, while none of Maegor's wives did.  Who is going to say to a dragonrider who claims to be a queen that in reality she is just a royal mistress?

Rhaenys and Visenya were not just both dragonriders they co-conquered Westeros with their brother-husband. It is not just Aegon the Conqueror it is also 'Rhaenys the Conqueress' and 'Visenya the Conqueress'. The conquered don't tell the conquered what they can and cannot do. But they can force them to accept their rules in the future and that's what Aegon did. He did not marry Rhaena to Maegor. Instead he married Maegor to Ceryse. He showed due deference to the Seven and the Faith, etc.

13 minutes ago, The Twinslayer said:

This is reinforced by the way polygamy is introduced in the novels.  The first mention is by Jorah, who tells Dany that she can take two husbands when the context is the same as Aegon's:  the marriages will take place outside of Westeros and all three of the marriage partners are going to be dragonriders.

Yeah, Dany is essentially Aegon 2.0 by the time she hatches the three dragons.

13 minutes ago, The Twinslayer said:

And there is an important difference between Aegon I and Rhaegar.  Rhaegar's marriage to Elia was performed in the Faith, which requires a vow of monogamy.  The Faith might recognize the validity of a first marriage conducted in the Valyrian custom or before a tree.  But after conducting Rhaegar's marriage to Elia in a sept, the Faith would never recognize the validity of a second marriage that violated the vows taken in the sept, or the legitimacy of a child born of that "marriage."

Exactly, that's why the Faith did not recognize Maegor's second marriage to Alys. Maegor actually wanted an annulment/divorce. He wanted to replace his barren wife with a new one, hopefully fertile but since Ceryse was the niece of the High Septon he had no chance of getting an annulment, taking another one instead thinking he could get away with it. It didn't work as intended.

Rhaegar's situation is even more complicated considering that Elia gave him two healthy children. There is no chance that he could have gotten out of that marriage. And as you are saying, the Faith does not allow you more than one wife.

13 minutes ago, The Twinslayer said:

And Rhaegar was a scholar.  He would have known about the problems caused by Maegor's polygamy and by Targaryen kings having legitmate (or legitimized) children from two different noble houses.  But he also would have known that virtually every other Prince of Dragonstone before him freely took mistresses with no negative consequences.  Why would he invite the kind of trouble caused by Maegor's polygamy and Aegon IV's decision to legitimize Daemon Blackfyre?  That makes no sense.

He would also have known that polygamy never came up to resolve the marital problems of the past Targaryens. Duncan and Jaehaerys could have taken two wives if this was a working scenario, as could have Daemon Blackfyre, Aegon the Unworthy, Rhaenyra, Daemon, whoever you want.

But while Rhaegar may have known all that that's no guarantee that he did not try. If love and prophecy had driven him mad he may have been capable of anything. But as I've been saying already, if he really did marry Lyanna in some rite - forcing a septon, using a tree, etc. - this doesn't mean anybody in Westeros would consider such a union valid or the child from such a union anything but a bastard.

There are precendents for polygamy in the US, too. But that doesn't mean all those polygamous marriages of those Mormon sects are accepted as valid by the state or the majority of the population.

13 minutes ago, The Twinslayer said:

On your #1-3, I agree that TWOIAF confirms that the line of succession between the king's grandson and his son is not fixed.  But we already knew that when we learned in ACOK that a Great Council chose Egg over Prince Maegor.  That told us that there was precedent for the king's younger son to inherit, and that the kingship does not pass automatically by primogeniture upon the death of the prior king -- when there is doubt, the Iron Throne remains vacant until the new king is chosen.

TWoIaF greatly expanded on that, though. Before that the Great Council there was just some sort of special occasion. Now we know that there were many instances where a king picked an heir and another where a vast majority of lords favored the scion of a younger branch over the claimant who had the right of primogeniture on his side.

Anybody who says now that Lyanna's son is the rightful king basically doesn't know what he or she is talking about. There are no rightful kings in this world. Kings are made.

[The Weirwoods Eyes]

30 minutes ago, The Twinslayer said:

 

There is one more big differences between Aegon/Rhaenys/Visenya (who got away with polygamy) and Maegor (who did not).  Aegon/Rhaenys/Visenya ALL had dragons, while none of Maegor's wives did.  Who is going to say to a dragonrider who claims to be a queen that in reality she is just a royal mistress?  

And there is an important difference between Aegon I and Rhaegar.  Rhaegar's marriage to Elia was performed in the Faith, which requires a vow of monogamy.  The Faith might recognize the validity of a first marriage conducted in the Valyrian custom or before a tree.  But after conducting Rhaegar's marriage to Elia in a sept, the Faith would never recognize the validity of a second marriage that violated the vows taken in the sept, or the legitimacy of a child born of that "marriage."    

And Rhaegar was a scholar.  He would have known about the problems caused by Maegor's polygamy and by Targaryen kings having legitmate (or legitimized) children from two different noble houses.  But he also would have known that virtually every other Prince of Dragonstone before him freely took mistresses with no negative consequences.  Why would he invite the kind of trouble caused by Maegor's polygamy and Aegon IV's decision to legitimize Daemon Blackfyre?  That makes no sense.

I don't agree with this.  The person who told Dany the fairy-tale version of Rhaegar and Lyanna was Viserys.  "Yet sometimes Dany would picture the way it had been, so often had her brother told her the stories.  The midnight flight to Dragonstone, moonlight shimmering on the ship's black sails.  Her brother Rhaegar battling the Usurper in the bloody waters of the Trident and dying for the woman he loved.  The sack of King's Landing by the ones Viserys called the Usurper's dogs, the lords Lannister and Stark."  It is only later that we learn that Viserys is wrong:  that is, when Ned tells us that Robert "avenged" Lyanna at the Trident and that he (Ned) did not participate in the Sack, and when Jaime tells us that Rhaella and Viserys fled during the day time rather than at night.

And we know that Connington was probably with Rhaegar when Rhaegar took Lyanna but we also know that Connington not only did not witness a Rhaegar-Lyanna wedding, he believes that it did not happen.  We know this from his POV in ADWD when he remembers Rhaegar's wedding (only one) and points out that Aegon/Young Griff that it would be impossible for Aegon/Young Griff to take more than one wife.  There is no way GRRM would have included that in Connington's POV if it had ever remotely occured to Connington that Rhaegar would have tried to do such a thing.    

And I don't believe there is any way Hightower would have "crowned" Lyanna's baby.  Jaime and Barristan tell us that the worst KG are the ones who play the game of thrones, and Jaime says that Criston Cole (the "Kingmaker") was one of the worst KG ever.  I don't think Hightower would want to go down in history as a new Criston Cole any more than Rhaegar would want to be seen as a new Maegor the Cruel.  

 

11

Firstly maegor DID get away with Polygamy. His brides are all recorded in history as wives.  No one denied they were wives, even those who were at war with him over him taking a second and subsequent wives. And upon taking the It he was not made to set anyone aside. Still wives!! 

You are making a false assumption with your assumption that the faith would recognise first non 7 marriages but not subsequent post-Sept marriages. There is literally nothing in the text which suggests this. In fact throughout the books any and all marriages are accepted as valid by all parties. Married in a Sept, sure, Valyrian style, no worries, Old Gods Weirwood tree, absolutely, out in the Dothraki sea under their customs why the hell not! And Some random mix up between the seven, the old gods and R'hllorism, Absolutely fine.  There is literally no mention anywhere that anyone see's any wedding' as invalid. Maegor wed his second bride in the Valyrian style after having wed his first in a sept, Go check the history book that is TWOIAF definitely lists her and the other brides as WIVES. 

yes, Rhaegar undoubtedly knew the trouble that polygamy has the potential to cause. if only he had some compelling belief in something far more important than mere politics to motivate him, Oh....wait. He did! 

So, who do you think told Viserys. Who was 6/7 at the time these tails? I mean he learnt them from someone. Cos at that age he hardly has the capacity to understand the goings on during the war and he'd hardly be his brothers chosen confidant regarding his actions, and feelings. 

So yes, Dany recalls Viserys telling her tails of the rebellion, the version he has learnt from.....His mother & Darry.

Some of the stuff you quoted there is absolutely obviously the biased recollections of Viserys who is not recalling in detail the events of the time. But rather the events as told to him by the adults who were around. Rhaella up until her death, meaning any knowledge he has of her version won't be as well recalled as if he had been older, and Darry until his death some years later.  Stories he likely told both children, and which Viserys continued to relay to danny as she grew after darry's death. Unless you think 6/7 yr old Viserys had first-hand knowledge of the Battle, and the sack, or read the letters the ravens brought to DS himself?  And that Rhaegar personally told him the story of how he took his Lady Lyanna whom he truly loved. 

We do not know that Connington was with Rhaegar at all, we know he took 6 of his closest companions, Connington may or may not have been one of them. 

We also don't know that he did not witness a wedding at all, we only know that in Dance GRRM didn't reveal that he did. As I covered already he may have been there but dismisses it as a fancy because Lyanna died, and Elia was the only one who he is aware bore Rhaegar children. He may have not been there at all, because as the text indicates Rhaegar wasn't as into the friendship as Connington cos well, connington was in love with him.  Or he may have been with them, but returned to KL before a wedding happened. 

And you don't think there is an irony in Hightower do it all by the book going down having done the one thing KG are not supposed to do? It seems evident Gerold Hightower was not a good man. he comes across as deeply unlikable. His having played the game of thrones seems in keeping with what we know of him. He seems very attached to the Targaryen dynasty and him viewing Jon as rightful king seems rather in keeping.

[The Weirwoods Eyes]

23 minutes ago, The Twinslayer said:

 

It would be pretty easy to pass a law saying:  (1) the marriages of Aegon I are ratified and the offspring of those marriages recognized as legimate, but (2) any future polygamous "marriage" will be a nullity.

The English Act of Settlement of 1701 said that no Roman Catholic could inherit the English throne.  That did not stop George I, and every single subsequent king or queen of England, from claiming the English throne -- even though they all trace their lineage back to a line of Catholic kings.  

 

The problem here is that any such law would be absurd. As it would delegitimise the entire Targaryen line. And has not nor can it be passed.

The example you give is false equivalence. in marriage, we establish the idea of legitimate children. And to declare a marriage illegitimate is to declare those offspring illegitimate too.  So Polygamy has to stand or else all targs become born of the bastard line

religion is an entirely separate issue. 

[Ygrain]

5 minutes ago, The Weirwoods Eyes said:

The problem here is that any such law would be absurd. As it would delegitimise the entire Targaryen line. And has not nor can it be passed.

The example you give is false equivalence. in marriage, we establish the idea of legitimate children. And to declare a marriage illegitimate is to declare those offspring illegitimate too.  So Polygamy has to stand or else all targs become born of the bastard line

religion is an entirely separate issue. 

The polygamy stands because GRRM says that there was and IS precedent. If a law was passed that banned the practice once and for all, the use of present tense wouldn't be possible because the precedent would no longer be valid.

[JNR]

7 hours ago, Rippounet said:

Or to put it differently, the KG's presence would be meaningful if the whole ToJ thing took place long after the Sack. But the chronology doesn't really allow for that or else you begin having other much bigger problems.

This is quite correct.  And it introduces various other issues...

For instance, if the ToJ happened soon after the Sack, that means the KG were getting information all along pretty quickly.   Because they already, soon after the Sack, know what happened re Jaime, Aerys, etc.

Quote

 

“When King’s Landing fell, Ser Jaime slew your king with a golden sword, and I wondered where you were.”

“Far away,” Ser Gerold Said, “or Aerys would yet sit the Iron Throne, and our false brother would burn in seven hells.”

 

Well, if they were getting information quickly, that also means they had plenty of time after the Trident to find out that their liege, to whom they had sworn their vow, was in mortal peril because Robert had won. 

They would have known Aerys had only one KG (Jaime) to defend him from this mortal peril, and, thanks to Rhaegar's defeat, he had no army.  Yet, quite curiously, they did not even try to go to King's Landing as far as we can tell.

This should tell us something important about the vow they swore.

7 hours ago, Rippounet said:

The real reason why you believe there are two sets of reasons is because you are starting from the conclusion and not from the facts.

Again, I have to congratulate you on the accuracy of your analysis. 

Any time someone says "the fact is that Rhaegar left the ToJ when Aerys had four KG" to defend him?  That person is missing the canonical reality... that it is impossible to show Rhaegar was ever at the ToJ.  Ever!  Even for a moment in his life.

At best, you can show, using the canon, that someone told Ned that Rhaegar had named the ToJ.  Whether that ever really happened... or where Rhaegar was when it happened... we do not know.

Those who maintain we do know Rhaegar was at the ToJ, and when, often resort to the app to justify this idea.   But in the same way Aegon is often called fAegon, I'm afraid the app (which GRRM did not write at all) can reasonably be called the fapp.

[King Ned Stark]

Assuming all the following to be true:

1-Rhaegar and Lyanna married.

2-Those 3 KG stayed to fulfill their duty to     their new king and queen regent (like Stannis told Massey - if I die seat Shireen on the throne).

Then that is possibly gonna cast some shade on Ned, right?  He chose war over a Lannister bastard, but before he chose peace and his friend over his nephew's right.

Is this another example of Ned getting clever with wording on someone's deathbed (Rob and Lyanna)?

Any thoughts on that, anyone?

[Lord Varys]

35 minutes ago, The Weirwoods Eyes said:

Firstly maegor DID get away with Polygamy. His brides are all recorded in history as wives.  No one denied they were wives, even those who were at war with him over him taking a second and subsequent wives. And upon taking the It he was not made to set anyone aside. Still wives!! 

Maegor did not get away with polygamy. The Realm rose against him and deposed him. And just as our history books recount the stories of kings and people with more than one wife we don't consider those marriages valid from our point of view. It might be the same with the people in Westeros.

History certainly counts Anne Boleyn as a wife of Henry VIII and a Queen of England but from a Catholic viewpoint (the only one that counts from their viewpoint) she was nothing but a mistress and her daughter Elizabeth II a bastard with no claim to the English throne.

And whether all of Maegor's wives were actually styled queen is open to debate. Ceryse was never a queen because Maegor left he before he usurped the throne. Alys was a queen. Tyanna is nowhere styled queen as far as I recall, and Elinor Costayne and Jeyne Westerling seem way too lowborn to be queens. Rhaena could have been a queen since her daughter Aerea was named Maegor's heir.

35 minutes ago, The Weirwoods Eyes said:

You are making a false assumption with your assumption that the faith would recognise first non 7 marriages but not subsequent post-Sept marriages. There is literally nothing in the text which suggests this. In fact throughout the books any and all marriages are accepted as valid by all parties. Married in a Sept, sure, Valyrian style, no worries, Old Gods Weirwood tree, absolutely, out in the Dothraki sea under their customs why the hell not! And Some random mix up between the seven, the old gods and R'hllorism, Absolutely fine.  There is literally no mention anywhere that anyone see's any wedding' as invalid. Maegor wed his second bride in the Valyrian style after having wed his first in a sept, Go check the history book that is TWOIAF definitely lists her and the other brides as WIVES.

How do you know that everybody in Westeros accepts every type of marriage? Maegor had to have this travesty of a secret wedding because no septon was willing to marry him to Alys. There is no indication that the Faith likes or even acknowledges marriages officiated by anybody besides a septon. Those tree marriages are a thing of the North. Andals don't do this kind of thing, and there would be a reason why nobody in the south marries in this fashion. Even Ned had to marry Catelyn in the Andal way.

How do you know that all marriages have the same rules. Some First Men kings had multiple wives. Those unions might not be define as one husband and one wife. The marriage vows of the Faith as very explicit in that regard.

Melisandre officiating at Sigorn and Alys' wedding is likely done because Cellador refused to do it, not to mention that neither Alys nor Sigorn were followers of the Seven (while Sigorn might actually have taken R'hllor as his god, we don't know).

We actually know that Davos considers some of Salladhor Saan's wives as mistresses, suggesting that he doesn't share your view that you can be properly married to more than one wife.

[SFDanny]

5 minutes ago, King Ned Stark said:

Assuming all the following to be true:

1-Rhaegar and Lyanna married.

2-Those 3 KG stayed to fulfill their duty to     their new king and queen regent (like Stannis told Massey - if I die seat Shireen on the throne).

Then that is possibly gonna cast some shade on Ned, right?  He chose war over a Lannister bastard, but before he chose peace and his friend over his nephew's right.

Is this another example of Ned getting clever with wording on someone's deathbed (Rob and Lyanna)?

Any thoughts on that, anyone?

Don't mistake what Ned believes for what the Kingsguard believe. Even if Rhaegar and Lyanna were married, it doesn't mean Ned knows this fact. Ned may well believe Jon is the bastard son of Rhaegar. It is unlikely that Lyanna is pleading with Ned to raise her son as her own with her dying breath, and has the time or the ability to describe to Ned her wedding to Rhaegar. Her priorities are Jon's safety, not his possible claim.

Now, your second point is of interest because it touches on what the Kingsguard trio know. Do they know that Viserys is Aerys's named heir? If so, it means they have reached their conclusion that their duty demands they stay and fight Ned for some other reason than defending their king.

[Rippounet]

3 hours ago, Ygrain said:

The fact is that Rhaegar left ToJ while there were four more KG at Aerys' disposal. The fact is that at the time of the ToJ showdown, there are zero KG at Viserys' disposal. The fact is that GRRM stated that the KG would take orders from Rhaegar, and the fact is that when the KG reply to Ned's "why are you here", they invoke their vows and status as KG, not orders. Up till the Sack (plus the time necessary for them to find out), Rhaegar's orders along the lines "stay and guard Lyanna" is enough to keep them there. After the Sack, with no more KG available, the three are in dereliction of their primary duty to protect the King, unless the King is right there in the tower. There is nothing circular about this discrepancy in their duties and behaviour.

But you're missing the main point, which is time. There can't be enough time between Jon's birth and Ned's arrival for the KG's presence at the ToJ to be meaningful. They've all stayed far away from the king for weeks or months, even after the Trident. At what point exactly is Jon's legitimacy supposed to have played a role? In order to argue that their presence means what you say it means you have to say there was a moment in time when the KG should have left the ToJ but decided to remain instead, because of Jon. This decisive moment would of course have to be after the Sack (or else Aegon comes before Jon) and after Jon's birth (otherwise he could have been a girl), but obviously before Ned's arrival.
This is why your argument is completely circular. You're arguing that Jon has to be legitimate because the KG were at the ToJ, but in order to use the KG's presence you have to argue that there was necessarily a point in time when Jon's legitimacy forced the KG to stay.
The problem is...  There's no way you can prove there was such a point in time.
It supposes that news of the Sack reached the KG before Ned, but also that Jon was born before Ned arrived. And as silly as this question may seem... Is there even anything in the text saying Jon was born before Ned arrived? Did the KG even know that Lyanna's baby would be a boy?

3 hours ago, Ygrain said:

For one, the dream doesn't necessarily cover the entirety of the conversation.

But that is your major problem: your interpretation of the fever dream only works if there was no additional exchange.

For starters if there was any additional exchange, it may mean that the KG are really receiving their information from Ned. The idea that they knew about the Sack before Ned's arrival already rests on very little (mainly, their use of the term: usurper).
Then there's the very significant problem that since we the readers know that Ned just had a terrible fight with Robert over the death of Aegon and Rhaenys, any additional exchange between the KG and Ned would have shown that there was no way Ned could be a threat to his own nephew. In other words, the only way Jon is the reason for this fight is if Ned and the KG do not communicate, as in the dream.

In a nutshell, we're back to what I said originally: any literal reading of the fever dream is probably mistaken.

[The Fattest Leech]

35 minutes ago, JNR said:

... I'm afraid the app (which GRRM did not write at all) can reasonably be called the fapp.

Errrr, slow the pony on this idea because the app information is the carryover information that would not fit in to the World book. Elio and Linda wrote about ~70,000 words for the World book, and George about ~300,000+/-, and George even says the app info was the extra info that could not fit in to the World book. Video link below. It should be linked to the 9 minute mark where he describes this process just a few seconds in.

 

[King Ned Stark]

12 minutes ago, SFDanny said:

Don't mistake what Ned believes for what the Kingsguard believe. Even if Rhaegar and Lyanna were married, it doesn't mean Ned knows this fact. Ned may well believe Jon is the bastard son of Rhaegar. It is unlikely that Lyanna is pleading with Ned to raise her son as her own with her dying breath, and has the time or the ability to describe to Ned her wedding to Rhaegar. Her priorities are Jon's safety, not his possible claim.

Now, your second point is of interest because it touches on what the Kingsguard trio know. Do they know that Viserys is Aerys's named heir? If so, it means they have reached their conclusion that their duty demands they stay and fight Ned for some other reason than defending their king.

Good point, perhaps there was confusion and miscommunication.  

For the second point, I can't see why they would be there for any other reason than they believe it is the right thing to do.  Have you seen any good ideas as to why they would still be with Lyanna and Jon if they didn't think Jon was heir?