just how Targaryen is Jon?

[The Dew]

The wolf, most probably at the dragon, no Targ features as far as I can think; no dragon dreams either

[Graydon Hicks]

i know this is a little off topic, but exactly how many house still hold a secret loyalty to house targaryen? i can readily assume the valyrian houses of velaryon and celtigar in the crownlands, but are there many others?

[hiraeth]

On 22.5.2017. at 3:57 PM, Wolfgirly said:

People are forgetting a very important thing: upbringing. Rhaegar was a crown prince who came from a powerful family and grew up royal. Jon Snow grew up in the north with the Starks, believing himself just a "bastard" as everyone called him that. He knows absolutely nothing about his real father, nor anyone else apart from Ned (who's taken his secrets to the grave) AND Bran who saw this during a warg timetrip.

Jon has certain characteristics of a leader and a warrior. Jon inherited his mother's hair and eyes but got his father's handsome features.

The first time Craster sees Jon he asks if Jon is a Stark - if it was only the matter of eye colour and hair colour, most people in the North and beyond the Wall have the same colouring, being the descendands of the First Men - there has to be something specific to his facial features, his stance and the whole appearance that would make Craster ask if Jon is a Stark the second he sees him. Similar things happen when Jon is with the Wildlings... And he is also very young, meaning that his features are less sharp than Ned's, and from what I gathered in the book, Jon is not described as a particularly handsome boy, especially in comparison with Loras or Jaime, and when he is called pretty it is almost always intended as a sort of insult. Val, Ygritte and Shireen find him handsome, though...

[SFDanny]

On 6/7/2017 at 2:40 PM, Voice said:

To be fair, on this matter, there is no evidence at hand, as of yet. And I cannot speak for the "some folks".

So in speaking only for myself (and mayhaps, on behalf of the First Men ), if/when @Ran provides the family tree with places of birth/death from GRRM/his minions that he claimed to have in his possession in WP's thread, I will gladly accept it as actual "available evidence".

Until that happy day, I think you do a disservice to your fellow forum-community members (and to yourself) by discounting educated dissent. It has been demonstrated that certain resources are flawed. (The wiki is fan-generated... the app is wiki-generated... and thus, when one cites the other as reference, we wind up with a non-canonical ouroboros of assumption, speculation, or accidental fan fiction.)

Therefore, it seems only right that such available resources not be given the "Evidence" label.

Skepticism and Dissent are not only welcome in a true discourse, they are the very foundation of it.

Voice, I've never made use of Ran's yet to be released family tree in any discussion of Lyanna's death or any other topic on these forums, so I'm not basing my view on his word about that resource or really anything else. My one real exception to this rule is Ran's role in telling readers what are errors in The World of Ice and Fire. That is clearly because of his role in it's production. I assume he knows what is in error, meaning what was a mistake in the printing of this book, not what is right or wrong in the history it tells. 

My views are from my reading of all the source material available, and if you want we can go over what that is again. Much of that argument, in my view, is around Ned's dream sequence (what is and is not within the dream) and the validity of the app as a resource. We have a disagreement over your assertion the app is "wiki-generated" because of the fundamental difference between the wiki and the app - the app is approved by the author, the wiki is not. So, I don't include wiki information as evidence unless there is valid argumentation and references that goes along with it. I do look at the app as author approved material that should be evaluated just as everything else in the books and from the author needs to be evaluated. When the app lists the tower of joy as the place of Lyanna's death, it needs to be compared to other evidence we know and a case for it or against it as valid information made. My take is that you have made an prior assumption that all information in the app should not be considered at all, no matter, what the supporting evidence shows us. Correct me if I'm wrong.

As to skepticism and dissent, I'm all for it. Any close read of my posts shows that. But, Voice, skepticism and dissent is needed with new ideas as well as old ones. I've challenged my share of old accepted ideas, and I will challenge new ones I have questions about or find lacking in evidence. I really have not a care in the world how accepted they become.

On 6/7/2017 at 2:40 PM, Voice said:

OK...?

I didn't make any arguments otherwise. Mayhaps this part of your comment was directed at someone else?

That was in response to this:

Quote

While I think it is laughable that Lyanna's presence at the tower would justify the presence of three of the finest kingsguard whose services could better have been employed elsewhere in this crucial time (e.g. on one of the major battlefields) regardless,

Did I misunderstand that this was from you? My point was that it is a mistake to assume the Kingsguard are at the Tower for the entire time. They may or may not have, but your quote above assumes the alternative to having been "on one of the major battlefields" is that they must have been at the tower and that makes no sense to you. Correct me if I read you wrong.

On 6/7/2017 at 2:40 PM, Voice said:

Hath canon been reduced to quotation marks of irony? Oh how the mighty have fallen.

Mayhaps the sword is mightier than the pen after all.

Please do not read irony into the use of quotation marks. If anything it was meant to highlight that the "they" who we find is straight out of the books, while the recent remarks about how many walk away from the combat is from the semi-canon source of the authors remarks. I do find irony in pleading that semi-canon sources shouldn't be trusted and only canon sources acceptable, until it is convenient to reverse the two for the sake of an argument. This is the only irony I meant to point out. Not the difference the author has chosen to make between canon and semi-cannon sources.

Just who is the mighty that is fallen is something about which you will have to enlighten me. The same with the sword and pen. Or Mayhaps not.

On 6/7/2017 at 2:40 PM, Voice said:

The bold seems an odd usage of absolutes, given that your premise is built upon the assumption that there were noncombatants present at the tower of joy.

Suffice it to say that no, that is not the only way to reconcile the text with GRRM's remarks.

GRRM's remarks are not at all confusing nor misleading if we remove the assumption that the location in which Ned & Lya were found by Howland and the "they" was not the tower of joy.

Not only that, GRRM's fever dream comment might be seen as an explicit warning that this precise assumption is made in error.

Assuming there were noncombatants at the tower, yes, it would then be possible But, GRRM wrote the act as Ned's own:

Ned had pulled the tower down afterward, and used its bloody stones to build eight cairns upon the ridge.

 

Ned's memory of how he had torn down the the tower does not in anyway mean he did so by himself. Where is Howland. the other survivor of the battle? Does Ned remembering his own labors in building the cairns mean Howland sat idly by, or was incapable of helping? I don't see how one can read that into his words. Rather it is only his memory of his own labor there.

As to your read of the location of Lyanna's death, we shall have to continue to differ. Ned's words at the start of the dream chapter place Lyanna at the tower. The appendix tells of Lyanna's death in the red mountains of Dorne which fits Ned's words. The app nails this down. Now if you, or someone else shows evidence beyond speculation to open this question back up, then fine. But barring that, I think this is a settled question.

On 6/7/2017 at 2:40 PM, Voice said:

Ah, yes. I've seen this argument before. It doesn't hold water and is easy to dismantle (like the tower long fallen).

First, we know that there were a great number of houses which fought for the dragon, and any one of them might have kept Lyanna abed for Rhaegar. For example, we know that House Martell was fighting for the crown, and Sunspear lies much further from the conflict, enemies, grumpkins and Starks, etc.

Second, if the purpose of sequestering Lyanna was to keep her from Rhaegar's enemies, the tower of joy was a very poor choice. Young Ned couldn't lift Robert's warhammer, but he was able to take the tower of joy with only six men. We are told in the text that it was a tower that was small/weak enough for Ned to pull down, with enough stone for eight cairns. Even if we allow Ned (in addition to his magical crannogman ex machina) a bunch of horses, lots of rope, and a host of noncombatants to assist in the effort, surely you must agree that the tower of joy was not a stronghold by any stretch of the imagination. It was pulled down in a bitter moment for no greater purpose than to make eight piles of rocks.

That isn't a secure location, SFD. And surely Rhaegar was smart enough to know that it wouldn't have been, and that there were far more secure alternatives available. To return to my previous example, Sunspear is a proper castle and far easier to defend from people who would have used Lyanna for their own purposes. (Rhaegar's bff's castle of Starfall would serve this purpose as well... and given the not-yet-fully-explained 'respect' between houses Stark and Dayne, and House Dayne's apparent neutrality during Robert's Rebellion, Starfall seems just as desirable, if not moreso.)

In other words, there's a reason why a siege is a difficult undertaking in ASOIAF. It's because a few men and horses can't just pull down ringwalls and towers when they feel like it. (Hence the construction of siege towers and trebuchets.)

The benefit of the Tower of Joy is it is hidden away from the reach of Winterfell, Storm's End, King's Landing, and Sunspear. All of which have different agendas than Rhaegar, and possibly Lyanna. It is not meant as a fortress to prevent these other great lords and the king from being able to take Lyanna by force. Its choice is not a military consideration about where one could best hold out in a siege. In that regard, it is more of a strategy to prevent being forced into a siege. If it was true that Rhaegar was searching for a site like you suggest, they would be behind the walls of Dragonstone hoping their forces would remain loyal to their prince instead of their king.

No, the tower looks to represent a strategy of stealth or retreat instead of military force. Much like Aegon II who hides away with peasants in Rhaenyra's own back yard, Rhaegar has chosen to stay hidden from all but those he trusts most. It after all does not make much sense to call his loyalists to arms and test his military might against any of the others who would seize Lyanna from him. His bannermen are very limited, and those who would support him owe their fealty to the king, not to him.

To go to Starfall invites the Martells to lay siege to their bannermen, assuming the Daynes are even willing to go against the will of Sunspear, and force them to surrender Lyanna. At this point, Rhaegar's strength, to the degree he has any independently, is in the lords who are part of his faction who cannot openly give him support. The tower and those who likely give support to those hiding there are a function, it seems to me, of that kind of strategy. Hidden away from all but those Rhaegar trusts most.

You say this is not "a secure location" but we know for months it is. It is only when Ser Gerold finds them that the secrecy of the tower seems to have be broken. Even then, it looks like Rhaegar makes it as secure as he can by leaving Ser Gerold there. We, frankly, need more information about how both Hightower and Ned find the location to make an educated judgement on whether this was a secure location and what changes could or should have been made and who should have made them. Factoring into all of this needs to be more information about Lyanna's condition and whether she could be moved.

On 6/7/2017 at 2:40 PM, Voice said:

While this rebuttal is quite speculative, I agree with the first part of it. Given the fever dream dialogue, it seems likely that the kingsguard knew that the war was over and that their side had lost the contest.

They may have wanted to die while defending Rhaegar's whelp. And I agree that is entirely possible. But of course they make no mention of that purpose, and instead speak as though Aerys is the one true king they are fighting for.

[Given the recent revelation that Aerys removed Rhaegar's children from the line of succession, and the lack of a wedding cloak about Lyanna's shoulders, the notion that the kingsguard were protecting an heir in that tower is simply not a plausible argument. Given that their own words affirm nothing of that sort, I remain comfortable upon my horse made of doubt.]

Not to bitterly pile bloody stones upon a ridge, but, there is another flaw in your logic. You are claiming that the three kingsguard take umbrage with the murder of women and children. ...Of course, Ned is not guilty of committing such atrocities and seems to have a reputation that contradicts such an association, but I can see how the kingsguard might make that association out of allegiance/bias/etc.

Anyway, let us move on to the specific flaw in your rebuttal.

Aerys killed women and children, and all seven members of the kingsguard not only accepted that practice, they protected Aerys while he did so.

Thus, while we have absolutely zero precedent for Aerys' kingsguard protecting women and children, we do have precedent for their protection of a king's right to kill women and children. And, rather than express relief at the fact that they no longer have to defend the king who ordered the deaths of every woman and child in Duskendale, the kingsguard present in Ned's fever dream remain steadfastly loyal to that Mad King; they make their allegiance to him plain.

Let me correct one thing first. The is no revelation about Rhaegar's children being removed from the line of succession. There is a revelation in The World of Ice and Fire that Viserys, not Aegon, is declared by Aerys to be his new heir after the news of Rhaegar's death. That doesn't mean a disinheritance of Rhaegar's line any more than Viserys I making Rhaenyra his heir disinherited Aegon II. Nor does that move make any sense given what we know.  After the Trident, Aerys thinks the Dornish have betrayed him, but at the same time he needs their continued participation in his war. He holds Elia and her children as hostage to the Martell's loyalty. If he also disinherits Aegon and Rhaenys he weakens his own leverage on Dorne. In short there is nothing that says a disinheritance happened and it makes little to no sense for it to have happened.

I would also argue the lack of a wedding cloak means nothing. That is a tradition we see but it is nowhere shown to be critical in the validation of a wedding or not. The plausibility of a wedding between Rhaegar and Lyanna rest squarely on our read of these two characters and what we think they would want to do. I've gone over the reasons why I think it likely so many times, and I can bore you with my thinking if you want, but I agree that a case can be made that Jon is not born legitimate. I even think it likely that Ned thinks that is so. I think he is wrong in that belief, but I think there is evidence he believes this.

I think the flaw in your logic here, Voice, is that you see the Kingsguard as static. That there is no arc in any of their development, save perhaps your own essay on Jaime. They are reduced to functions of guarding the king. Yet we know Dayne and Whent are very likely Rhaegar partisans. We see the arc of Selmy's development and his abandonment of Viserys, and his revelation about Joffrey, and his embrace of Daenerys. We see Lewyn is close to Rhaegar and is used by Aerys to deliver his threat to the Martells  about Elia. We see Rhaegar talk openly about a great council to Jaime, in Darry's presence, and his attempt to cultivate the loyalty of these Kingsguard. And we see Hightower obey Rhaegar's orders instead of returning to King's Landing. It is my belief that Aerys's threats towards Elia and Rhaegar's children are key to some of this transformation. So, yes, the Kingsguard stand by and witnesses Aerys's cruelty, but that doesn't mean they are not effected by it, and it certainly doesn't mean threats to Elia and her children do not effect them. See Ser Barristan's memories if you don't think this is so. Or even more so, Jaime's. He does, after all, kill Aerys rather than allow him to set fire to all of King's Landing.

On 6/7/2017 at 2:40 PM, Voice said:

Again, so many assumptions in this, but that's ok. I don't mind entertaining them for the purpose of debate. But, I must point out that we have no cause to assume the kg, nor Lyanna, feared Ned. The words of the kingsguard in Ned's fever dream do not sound fearful, nor protective of anyone. Lyanna's words from her bed of blood do beg promises, however. And I think it is completely within the bounds of reason to propose that she pleaded for things that she wanted, and feared the opposite of those desires. She may well have believed that Ned was capable of those opposites, given that she pleaded with him. And if the protection/adoption of Jon Snow was her paramount concern, which I think we both believe, then it certainly stands to reason that she believed Jon might be harmed and that Ned might feel obliged to allow that harm to take place.

Plus, the text explicitly states that Lyanna felt fear:

"I was with her when she died," Ned reminded the king. "She wanted to come home, to rest beside Brandon and Father." He could hear her still at times. Promise me, she had cried, in a room that smelled of blood and roses. Promise me, Ned. The fever had taken her strength and her voice had been faint as a whisper, but when he gave her his word, the fear had gone out of his sister's eyes. Ned remembered the way she had smiled then, how tightly her fingers had clutched his as she gave up her hold on life, the rose petals spilling from her palm, dead and black. After that he remembered nothing. They had found him still holding her body, silent with grief. The little crannogman, Howland Reed, had taken her hand from his. Ned could recall none of it. "I bring her flowers when I can," he said. "Lyanna was … fond of flowers."

 

Lyanna was a strong child-woman she-wolf Stark of Winterfell, but nevertheless, with fear in her eyes, she cried when she said, "Promise me, Ned."

Here we agree. Nice to be able to stop on that point.

[Wolfgirly]

On 10/06/2017 at 4:12 PM, hiraeth said:

The first time Craster sees Jon he asks if Jon is a Stark - if it was only the matter of eye colour and hair colour, most people in the North and beyond the Wall have the same colouring, being the descendands of the First Men - there has to be something specific to his facial features, his stance and the whole appearance that would make Craster ask if Jon is a Stark the second he sees him. Similar things happen when Jon is with the Wildlings... And he is also very young, meaning that his features are less sharp than Ned's, and from what I gathered in the book, Jon is not described as a particularly handsome boy, especially in comparison with Loras or Jaime, and when he is called pretty it is almost always intended as a sort of insult. Val, Ygritte and Shireen find him handsome, though...

Yes this is true but I think Jon is very attractive, even the actor whoplays him is handsome and fitting as Rhaegars son.