R+L=J v.165

[Ygrain]

Done :-)

[Corvo the Crow]

One thing I wonder, if Jon is not born out of wedlock, why did Ned not stake his claim? It's so uncharacteristic of him. He refuses both Renly's and Petyr's offers due to his honor and tries to install Stannis despite having no power of his own. Stannis is nothing to him and a bad canditate  besides as many of the greathouses don't care for him or dislike him at best.

Jon on the other hand is Rhaegar's son with Lyanna, his own nephew and at the time he had a great force of his own, perhaps the most numerous one in his powe bloc as riverlands, vale and stormlands were fragmented during the war and it's not like Hoster would go against his son in law who could very well be Hand for many years to come. 

 

[Bael's Bastard]

1 hour ago, Corvo the Crow said:

One thing I wonder, if Jon is not born out of wedlock, why did Ned not stake his claim? It's so uncharacteristic of him. He refuses both Renly's and Petyr's offers due to his honor and tries to install Stannis despite having no power of his own. Stannis is nothing to him and a bad canditate  besides as many of the greathouses don't care for him or dislike him at best.

Jon on the other hand is Rhaegar's son with Lyanna, his own nephew and at the time he had a great force of his own, perhaps the most numerous one in his powe bloc as riverlands, vale and stormlands were fragmented during the war and it's not like Hoster would go against his son in law who could very well be Hand for many years to come. 

It makes perfect sense. Ned rebelled against House Targaryen, overthrew House Targaryen, placed Robert and House Baratheon on the Iron Throne, and swore his oaths to them. Ned regards Robert as his rightful king, and Stannis as Robert's rightful heir. Jon is an heir to a house he overthrew and has no interest in restoring to power. That Jon is his nephew doesn't change that.

[Ygrain]

Not to mention that pushing Jon's claim would mean another civil war, and that is not something Ned would want.

[Alexis-something-Rose]

War. The realm was doing well under Robert (read Jon Arryn), why plunge the realm into another war? 

[Lord Varys]

The question is not stupid:

If Ned had been confirmed as Lord Regent and Protector of the Realm he could have called a Great Council to discuss the succession of King Robert. And at such a council the Targaryen claims could have been assessed as well.

Ned's strange obsession with 'King Stannis' makes sense as a plot device to ensure that things would explode, but one really wonders why it falls to Cat to later think of this peaceful means of settling the succession and not Eddard Stark.

It might be that part of the promise he made to Lyanna involved ensuring the child never learned the truth and would never enter the game of thrones as a player or pawn because that would, in Lyanna's opinion, only get him killed - but if that's the case we don't know it.

Ned is a very odd Baratheon loyalist, defending a girl whose brother and son might become the greatest threat to House Baratheon.

[Bael's Bastard]

5 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

The question is not stupid:

If Ned had been confirmed as Lord Regent and Protector of the Realm he could have called a Great Council to discuss the succession of King Robert. And at such a council the Targaryen claims could have been assessed as well.

Ned's strange obsession with 'King Stannis' makes sense as a plot device to ensure that things would explode, but one really wonders why it falls to Cat to later think of this peaceful means of settling the succession and not Eddard Stark.

It might be that part of the promise he made to Lyanna involved ensuring the child never learned the truth and would never enter the game of thrones as a player or pawn because that would, in Lyanna's opinion, only get him killed - but if that's the case we don't know it.

Ned is a very odd Baratheon loyalist, defending a girl whose brother and son might become the greatest threat to House Baratheon.

Ned has absolutely no reason at all to assess Targaryen claims. The suggestion is absurd. A promise to Lyanna isn't necessary to explain this. Jon had no claim to the regime Ned helped put in power.

[Ser Leftwich]

2 hours ago, Corvo the Crow said:

One thing I wonder, if Jon is not born out of wedlock, why did Ned not stake his claim? It's so uncharacteristic of him. He refuses both Renly's and Petyr's offers due to his honor and tries to install Stannis despite having no power of his own. Stannis is nothing to him and a bad canditate  besides as many of the greathouses don't care for him or dislike him at best.

Jon on the other hand is Rhaegar's son with Lyanna, his own nephew and at the time he had a great force of his own, perhaps the most numerous one in his powe bloc as riverlands, vale and stormlands were fragmented during the war and it's not like Hoster would go against his son in law who could very well be Hand for many years to come. 

 

When is Ned be staking this claim? Right when Ned finds Jon OR after Robert is dead? It makes for two very different discussions.

[Lord Varys]

20 minutes ago, Bael's Bastard said:

Ned has absolutely no reason at all to assess Targaryen claims. The suggestion is absurd. A promise to Lyanna isn't necessary to explain this. Jon had no claim to the regime Ned helped put in power.

He could at least assess all the Baratheon claims, could he not? To prevent the civil war he instead helped to cause with his ridiculous Stannis idea.

And if Aenys Blackfyre could attend the Great Council of 233 AC, then Daenerys Targaryen or 'Jon Snow' or whoever else thought to have a claim to the Iron Throne (Edric Storm, say, or Mya Stone) could show up there, too.

And Ned certainly would have 'a reason' to consider the claim of 'his son' since he would know who 'Jon' actually was. If your 'son' was a royal prince then you would think about that in his situation, too. Ned would have certainly done so, although the narrator obviously chose not to tell us. He could, of course, decide to ignore that because he wanted to keep it a secret - but then, what right does Eddard Stark actually have to not tell the son of Rhaegar Targaryen who his true father is? Robert was dying and no longer a danger to Jon.

[Bael's Bastard]

15 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

He could at least assess all the Baratheon claims, could he not? To prevent the civil war he instead helped to cause with his ridiculous Stannis idea.

No, that would have been completely absurd. Once you eliminate Cersei's children from the equation, as Ned intended to do, there is no claim greater or equal to Stannis's. Renly explicitly acknowledges as much: "Were it only true, you would indeed be Robert's heir" (ACOK: Catelyn III). There aren't multiple "Baratheon claims" to consider. Even Renly doesn't pretend he has a "Baratheon claim." In fact, he goes so far as to deny that Robert himself had any right or claim other than what he won with his warhammer, and points to the tens of thousands of men following him as his own claim. So it would have been utterly ridiculous for Ned to do anything like what you are suggesting.

15 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

And if Aenys Blackfyre could attend the Great Council of 233 AC, then Daenerys Targaryen or 'Jon Snow' or whoever else thought to have a claim to the Iron Throne (Edric Storm, say, or Mya Stone) could show up there, too.

Apples and oranges. Aenys was from a rival bastard branch of House Targaryen. Daenerys and Jon are from a house that Robert and his allies overthrew and replaced with his own.

15 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

And Ned certainly would have 'a reason' to consider the claim of 'his son' since he would know who 'Jon' actually was. If your 'son' was a royal prince then you would think about that in his situation, too. Ned would have certainly done so, although the narrator obviously chose not to tell us. He could, of course, decide to ignore that because he wanted to keep it a secret - but then, what right does Eddard Stark actually have to not tell the son of Rhaegar Targaryen who his true father is? Robert was dying and no longer a danger to Jon.

That is baseless fan fiction. Ned had no reason to consider Jon's claim, and clearly didn't waste a second considering it, because Jon's only claim was to a house he himself overthrew, and which he didn't recognize as the rightful kings of Westeros. Hence, why he explicitly states that the throne passes by rights to Stannis, and that the throne is Stannis's by rights, and that he would welcome his ascent. 

[Lord Varys]

1 hour ago, Bael's Bastard said:

No, that would have been completely absurd. Once you eliminate Cersei's children from the equation, as Ned intended to do, there is no claim greater or equal to Stannis's. Renly explicitly acknowledges as much: "Were it only true, you would indeed be Robert's heir" (ACOK: Catelyn III). There aren't multiple "Baratheon claims" to consider. Even Renly doesn't pretend he has a "Baratheon claim." In fact, he goes so far as to deny that Robert himself had any right or claim other than what he won with his warhammer, and points to the tens of thousands of men following him as his own claim. So it would have been utterly ridiculous for Ned to do anything like what you are suggesting.

There was also a clear heir of King Maekar in 233 AC. Bloodraven didn't care, either. Why should Ned? And how does Ned even know that Stannis wants to be king? Perhaps he would prefer Renly like Aemon preferred Egg? We don't know.

1 hour ago, Bael's Bastard said:

Apples and oranges. Aenys was from a rival bastard branch of House Targaryen. Daenerys and Jon are from a house that Robert and his allies overthrew and replaced with his own.

So what? The Blackfyres were also driven into exile and should have had no right to ever return and push their 'claims' - which Bloodraven made clear when he took Aenys' head.

Robert is as much a Targaryen himself as the Blackfyres were. The Baratheons are a bastard cadet branch of House Targaryen, too, as well as a female cadet branch. They are not a new house unrelated to the old dynasty.

1 hour ago, Bael's Bastard said:

That is baseless fan fiction. Ned had no reason to consider Jon's claim, and clearly didn't waste a second considering it, because Jon's only claim was to a house he himself overthrew, and which he didn't recognize as the rightful kings of Westeros. Hence, why he explicitly states that the throne passes by rights to Stannis, and that the throne is Stannis's by rights, and that he would welcome his ascent. 

How do you know all that? Do you know Ned's mind? No, you don't - else you would know all about what Ned truly thinks about Rhaegar, Lyanna, and their child.

From a political perspective Ned acted like an utter moron in AGoT by insisting to crown a pretender before even asking him. Granted, he wanted to invite Stannis to take the throne - but that's not the same as the man accepting it (he could have refused) - and what then?

The proper way to peacefully deal with the Cersei situation would have been to indeed call a Great Council and then put the knowledge about the twincest in front of the lords so that they can make of that what they will. Just taking matters in your own hands in the clumsy way Ned tried to do it would never possibly stop a civil war - even (and especially) if Stannis were crowned king.

Jaehaerys I also had a clear heir after Baelon died - Prince Viserys, Baelon's eldest son who would have been king if Baelon I had ever ruled. But it was clear that Corlys Velaryon was not accepting this. Hence the Great Council. Tywin (and perhaps Renly and the Tyrells, too) would have never accepted a King Stannis, so the proper way to resolve this thing peacefully would have been a Great Council.

[JNR]

20 hours ago, Corvo the Crow said:

One thing I wonder, if Jon is not born out of wedlock, why did Ned not stake his claim?

Imagine you are Ned. 

Imagine R+L=J and all the usual assumptions that come with it, such as the standard TOJ scenario.

How, in the face of the Rebellion just concluded, do you

1) Prove this baby, that no one knew existed, is the rightful heir to Rhaegar?

2) Overrule Aerys appointing Viserys as his heir? ... which Aerys did when both of Rhaegar's children were alive, bumping them down in the line -- a situation that would apply to Jon as well.

3) Persuade anybody in power, anywhere in Westeros... such as your best friend King Robert, who sits the throne... that another Targ is a better idea than King Robert?

4) Dismiss your sacred promises to your dying sister to raise this baby as your bastard and hide his true identity?

I doubt Ned would have had a good answer to any of these challenges.

[The Twinslayer]

22 hours ago, Corvo the Crow said:

One thing I wonder, if Jon is not born out of wedlock, why did Ned not stake his claim? It's so uncharacteristic of him. He refuses both Renly's and Petyr's offers due to his honor and tries to install Stannis despite having no power of his own. Stannis is nothing to him and a bad canditate  besides as many of the greathouses don't care for him or dislike him at best.

Jon on the other hand is Rhaegar's son with Lyanna, his own nephew and at the time he had a great force of his own, perhaps the most numerous one in his powe bloc as riverlands, vale and stormlands were fragmented during the war and it's not like Hoster would go against his son in law who could very well be Hand for many years to come. 

 

Ned doesn't think that Jon was born within wedlock.  He believes that Jon is a bastard born of lust.  "Riding through the rainy night, Ned saw Jon Snow's face in front of him, so like a younger version of his own.  If the gods frowned so on bastards, why did they fill men with such lusts?"

20 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

The question is not stupid:

If Ned had been confirmed as Lord Regent and Protector of the Realm he could have called a Great Council to discuss the succession of King Robert. And at such a council the Targaryen claims could have been assessed as well.

Ned's strange obsession with 'King Stannis' makes sense as a plot device to ensure that things would explode, but one really wonders why it falls to Cat to later think of this peaceful means of settling the succession and not Eddard Stark.

It might be that part of the promise he made to Lyanna involved ensuring the child never learned the truth and would never enter the game of thrones as a player or pawn because that would, in Lyanna's opinion, only get him killed - but if that's the case we don't know it.

Ned is a very odd Baratheon loyalist, defending a girl whose brother and son might become the greatest threat to House Baratheon.

I think Ned was planning to call a Great Council at which he would support Stannis.  But his goal was not to ensure that Stannis became king.  It was to prevent Joffrey from becoming king. 

And I don't think it was because he wanted to make sure that the lawful heir became king.  It was all about preventing the Lannisters from taking power, because Ned hated the Lannisters. 

I think Ned would have accepted a king other than Stannis (like Renly, for example), if that was the vote of the Council provided that the new king was not related to Tywin.  And he hoped to accomplish that by presenting the incest story to the Council.  

Look at this:  "The need for deceit was a bitter taste in his mouth, but Ned knew he must tread softly here, must keep his counsel and play the game until he was firmly established as regent.  There would be time enough to deal with the succession when Arya and Sansa were safely back in Winterfell, and Lord Stannis had returned to King's Landing with all his power."  

That does not sound to me like he was planning to take the throne from Joffrey by force and give it to Stannis.  More like, he wanted to call a Council where Stannis' army would be available to balance out the Lannister forces and to ensure that the Lannisters did not try to use force to pre-empt the Council.  

[Corvo the Crow]

21 hours ago, Bael's Bastard said:

It makes perfect sense. Ned rebelled against House Targaryen, overthrew House Targaryen, placed Robert and House Baratheon on the Iron Throne, and swore his oaths to them. Ned regards Robert as his rightful king, and Stannis as Robert's rightful heir. Jon is an heir to a house he overthrew and has no interest in restoring to power. That Jon is his nephew doesn't change that.

Was Robert placed as king immediately after the sack or after some time has passed? Doesn't matter, If Jon was legit the Ned we know would stake his claim no matter what.

 

21 hours ago, Ygrain said:

Not to mention that pushing Jon's claim would mean another civil war, and that is not something Ned would want.

Not if he does it immediately. No one would have the stomach to do more fighting at that point, especially with the peace and soldiers going home. Ned has perhaps the biggest army in his bloc composed from a single region, Hoster is his father in law, Jon is not only his foster father but also his brother through marriagr and also son in law to Hoster, at worst he'll be neutral, more likely he'll see this as a better solution. Only one in that bloc who'll strongly disagree is the weakest Overlord among them, Robert. Tywin can quickly disentengle himself by cutting loose Amory and Gregor. Loyalists would also feel less fucked with just Aerys deposed and not the Targaryens removed entirely. Only exception coule be Dorne, they can be granted marriages and heads, perhaps even Tywin's.

[Bael's Bastard]

3 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

There was also a clear heir of King Maekar in 233 AC. Bloodraven didn't care, either. Why should Ned? And how does Ned even know that Stannis wants to be king? Perhaps he would prefer Renly like Aemon preferred Egg? We don't know.

So what? The Blackfyres were also driven into exile and should have had no right to ever return and push their 'claims' - which Bloodraven made clear when he took Aenys' head.

Robert is as much a Targaryen himself as the Blackfyres were. The Baratheons are a bastard cadet branch of House Targaryen, too, as well as a female cadet branch. They are not a new house unrelated to the old dynasty.

How do you know all that? Do you know Ned's mind? No, you don't - else you would know all about what Ned truly thinks about Rhaegar, Lyanna, and their child.

From a political perspective Ned acted like an utter moron in AGoT by insisting to crown a pretender before even asking him. Granted, he wanted to invite Stannis to take the throne - but that's not the same as the man accepting it (he could have refused) - and what then?

The proper way to peacefully deal with the Cersei situation would have been to indeed call a Great Council and then put the knowledge about the twincest in front of the lords so that they can make of that what they will. Just taking matters in your own hands in the clumsy way Ned tried to do it would never possibly stop a civil war - even (and especially) if Stannis were crowned king.

Jaehaerys I also had a clear heir after Baelon died - Prince Viserys, Baelon's eldest son who would have been king if Baelon I had ever ruled. But it was clear that Corlys Velaryon was not accepting this. Hence the Great Council. Tywin (and perhaps Renly and the Tyrells, too) would have never accepted a King Stannis, so the proper way to resolve this thing peacefully would have been a Great Council.

Thankfully, we have Ned's explicit thoughts and statements on the matter:, and have no need to blather on with baseless speculation about something we already know the answer to

'He drew out a fresh sheet of paper and dipped his quill in the inkpot. To His Grace, Stannis of the House Baratheon, he wrote. By the time you receive this letter, your brother Robert, our King these past fifteen years, will be dead. He was savaged by a boar whilst hunting in the kingswood …' (Ned in AGOT: Eddard XIII)

'"The throne by rights passes to Lord Stannis, the elder of Robert's two brothers."' (Ned in AGOT: Eddard XIII)

'"Unless, my lord? There is no seeming to this. Stannis is the heir. Nothing can change that."' (Ned in AGOT: Eddard XIII)

'"It is not a choice. Stannis is the heir."' (Ned in AGOT: Eddard XIII)

'"Would that I could," Ned said grimly. If she was so determined to force the issue here and now, she left him no choice. "Your son has no claim to the throne he sits. Lord Stannis is Robert's true heir."' (Ned in AGOT: Eddard XIV)

'"Stannis Baratheon is Robert's true heir," Ned said. "The throne is his by rights. I would welcome his ascent."' (Ned in AGOT: Eddard XV)

We have absolutely zero reason to believe that Ned ever considered or ever would have considered putting Jon or any other Targaryen back on the throne he clearly regards as belonging to Robert and House Baratheon. And in no way, shape, or form is Jon or any other Targaryen an heir to Robert and House Baratheon, no matter how much Targaryen ancestry Robert has.

[Bael's Bastard]

46 minutes ago, The Twinslayer said:

I think Ned was planning to call a Great Council at which he would support Stannis.  But his goal was not to ensure that Stannis became king.  It was to prevent Joffrey from becoming king. 

And I don't think it was because he wanted to make sure that the lawful heir became king.  It was all about preventing the Lannisters from taking power, because Ned hated the Lannisters. 

I think Ned would have accepted a king other than Stannis (like Renly, for example), if that was the vote of the Council provided that the new king was not related to Tywin.  And he hoped to accomplish that by presenting the incest story to the Council.  

Look at this:  "The need for deceit was a bitter taste in his mouth, but Ned knew he must tread softly here, must keep his counsel and play the game until he was firmly established as regent.  There would be time enough to deal with the succession when Arya and Sansa were safely back in Winterfell, and Lord Stannis had returned to King's Landing with all his power."  

That does not sound to me like he was planning to take the throne from Joffrey by force and give it to Stannis.  More like, he wanted to call a Council where Stannis' army would be available to balance out the Lannister forces and to ensure that the Lannisters did not try to use force to pre-empt the Council.  

Wrong. Ned very clearly intended to put Stannis on the throne, and calls it treason when Littlefinger suggests a plan that would put someone other than Stannis on the throne, whether Joffrey or Renly.

[Corvo the Crow]

2 hours ago, JNR said:

Imagine you are Ned. 

Imagine R+L=J and all the usual assumptions that come with it, such as the standard TOJ scenario.

How, in the face of the Rebellion just concluded, do you

1) Prove this baby, that no one knew existed, is the rightful heir to Rhaegar?

2) Overrule Aerys appointing Viserys as his heir? ... which Aerys did when both of Rhaegar's children were alive, bumping them down in the line -- a situation that would apply to Jon as well.

3) Persuade anybody in power, anywhere in Westeros... such as your best friend King Robert, who sits the throne... that another Targ is a better idea than King Robert?

4) Dismiss your sacred promises to your dying sister to raise this baby as your bastard and hide his true identity?

I doubt Ned would have had a good answer to any of these challenges.

1. Hey I am honorable Ned, though I don't have much of a reputation now, my guardian and foster brother now me to be a man of honor, among so many other lords  mostly of the vale. This here young boy looking so much like a Stark is of my blood but not of my body. Remember my sister, the pretty and young wild girl with the staple Stark looks Rhaegar kidnapped? It turns out woman can become pregnant if a man is involved and he is their son.

 

2. I am Ned from the winning side, would you prefer Targaryens you fought for removed entirely and my hothead foster brother as the new king or would you prefer them    staying in power with my newborn nephew as king, under a regency council with seats to losing sight also and many marriages made to knit the realm together?

3. Hoster is already in pocket, most loyalists with perhaps the exception of Dorne would definitely think so. Jon Arryn is neutral at worst, more like to be supportive as it means a smoother transition of power from Aerys to anyone else. Two likely opposers from the winning side are Robert of the least power with many of his targ loyalist bannermen and Tywin with his war crimes.

So, Of these three likely opposers, Dorne would definitely go Jon over Robert. Robert and Tywin can be handled without bloodshed.

 

4. No idea on what the promise excactly was. It can simply be to protect him from robert and not to hide his identity and adopt him as a son.

[Bael's Bastard]

22 minutes ago, Corvo the Crow said:

Was Robert placed as king immediately after the sack or after some time has passed? Doesn't matter, If Jon was legit the Ned we know would stake his claim no matter what.

Jon's legitimacy was irrelevant, because a legitimate Jon is still only an heir to a house Ned just rebelled against and overthrew and replaced with a new house on the Iron Throne. Ned wasn't a Targaryen loyalist. The Targaryen succession meant nothing to him by the time he discovered Jon. Jon turning out to be his nephew, and his nephew turning out to be a legitimate son of Rhaegar wouldn't have changed that. He had renounced Aerys and the Targaryens as his king. Robert was his king.

[Lord Varys]

23 minutes ago, Bael's Bastard said:

We have absolutely zero reason to believe that Ned ever considered or ever would have considered putting Jon or any other Targaryen back on the throne he clearly regards as belonging to Robert and House Baratheon. And in no way, shape, or form is Jon or any other Targaryen an heir to Robert and House Baratheon, no matter how much Targaryen ancestry Robert has.

But that isn't was I said or doubted. I do know that Ned wanted to make Stannis king. I just pointed out that Ned didn't think about the Great Council thing (to prevent the inevitable war Littlefinger tells him is coming - and he himself must know is coming, too) if he does that and I pointed out that Ned inevitably must have known about Jon's claim (and the Targaryen claim) when he decided who would succeed Robert - because anyone in his particular situation would have done that.

You cannot tell us Ned's heart about any of that because we don't know it. All we know are basically his outward actions since we have no important thoughts of Ned revolving around Jon or the Targaryens.

We don't even know what caused his staunch opposition to the Daenerys assassination idea. It could be it was strictly about the fact that she was an innocent girl. But it could also be that the fact that Viserys and Daenerys were Jon's uncle and aunt and Dany's child would be Jon's cousin that played into all that.

[Lord Varys]

1 hour ago, The Twinslayer said:

I think Ned was planning to call a Great Council at which he would support Stannis.  But his goal was not to ensure that Stannis became king.  It was to prevent Joffrey from becoming king. 

I'd like to believe that but there is no indication that he was intending to do such a thing. He wanted to get himself confirmed as Lord Regent and Protector of the Realm, and then he wanted to invite Stannis to take the crown. There is no indicate he wanted to openly discuss the succession like it was done at the Great Councils in the past.

The first to mention a Great Council as a political possibility in the present is Catelyn when she talks to Renly and Stannis.