R+L=J v.165

[Jô Maltese]

16 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

SNIP

Howland Reed will be credible to most I think. Bran will be credible to Jon and the wider/wilder North. Sam's possible discovery in the Citadel will be credible to all the maesters... And Stannis for that matter IMHO. A significant Targaryen artefact in Lyanna's Tomb (Dark Sister? Rhaegar's harp?) will significantly raise Jon's legitimacy. And if it was not that secret as you rightly point out, then I suspect that Jaimie knows. Actually, the only main character I see struggling to accept his legitimacy whatever the evidence is Dany (ok, and Cersei). 

But, in the end, it does not really matter if the proofs are solid or not: as yourself once said  Power resides where men believe it resides. No more and no less. I suspect that Jon's heroics in the Long Night 2.0 will convince the people he is the PtwP, so the dots will be connected with hindsight.

More importantly, whatever the outcome, I think the readers will need to know that Jon was the legitimate King at the closure of the books - even if he never was.

[Dorian Martell's son]

3 hours ago, Jô Maltese said:

How come? Was the theory confirmed? Shush... 

It was confirmed just over two and a half years ago, but forum rules make it so we are not allowed to speak of it here 

 

[Lord Varys]

1 hour ago, Jô Maltese said:

Howland Reed will be credible to most I think.

What makes you think anyone will listen to the head bog devil? I mean, seriously, Howland Reed should be as credible to the average lord or knight of the Seven Kingdoms as Shagga son of Dolf. And people even ignore the just and honorable Stannis Baratheon's view on his brother's children. And the great men and women of Westeros actually do know Stannis personally or at least by reputation. Who actually knows who Howland Reed is?

1 hour ago, Jô Maltese said:

Bran will be credible to Jon and the wider/wilder North.

Bran certainly can tell Jon. Not sure the North would want to believe that, though - 'Jon Snow' the son of Rhaegar cannot be Lord of Winterfell or King in the North as Robb's legitimized heir. And I'm inclined to believe the Lords of the North might end up preferring the bastard to the cripple, the child, or the girls.

1 hour ago, Jô Maltese said:

Sam's possible discovery in the Citadel will be credible to all the maesters...

There is no indication whatsoever in the books that any 'evidence' about this is hidden in the Citadel. That's an utterly silly plot line.

1 hour ago, Jô Maltese said:

A significant Targaryen artefact in Lyanna's Tomb (Dark Sister? Rhaegar's harp?) will significantly raise Jon's legitimacy.

How? All of Westeros is not going to make a pilgrimage to the Winterfell crypts... All this would 'prove' is that some POV characters have to be of a ghoulish disposition (why on earth should anyone want to desecrate Lyanna's tomb?!) and that Eddard Stark decided to put something of Rhaegar's into her tomb - how does this affect Jon Snow's status or points to his true parentage? It couldn't even help to establish a marriage between them if the marriage were actually made in secret.

All such a weirdo move on the part of Ned and whoever desecrates the tomb would do is to make both Ned and George being strangely sentimental. There are readers who would like that - and for us, who we actually have a lot of other hints this would actually be a strong 'hint'. But if we have just that and never also witness a vision of Bran's giving us the entire truth we'll never know as well. Howland and Wylla telling stories would just be stories.

I'm quite certain Jon is going to pay his mother a visit in the crypts once he learns the truth. But I'm very certain he is not going to disturb her peace. Unless, of course, she rises with blue eyes along with all the other Stark corpses and he has to put her down for good.

1 hour ago, Jô Maltese said:

And if it was not that secret as you rightly point out, then I suspect that Jaimie knows.

Jaime would know about the marriage in such a scenario, but the marriage is nothing. Even knowledge of Lyanna's pregnancy would be nothing. What people need is proof that 'Jon Snow' is Lyanna's child by Rhaegar.

1 hour ago, Jô Maltese said:

Actually, the only main character I see struggling to accept his legitimacy whatever the evidence is Dany (ok, and Cersei). 

Dany is actually one of the few people we know of who buy into the romance version of the Lyanna-Rhaegar story. She might also know about a marriage between Rhaegar and Lyanna considering that Rhaegar didn't really have a good reason to keep such a thing from his parents even if it were kept secret from the public.

I'm not sure Cersei is going to deign as ridiculous as story as Jon Snow's parentage with a mental or spoken refutation ;-).

1 hour ago, Jô Maltese said:

But, in the end, it does not really matter if the proofs are solid or not: as yourself once said  Power resides where men believe it resides. No more and no less. I suspect that Jon's heroics in the Long Night 2.0 will convince the people he is the PtwP, so the dots will be connected with hindsight.

At this point very few important people are obsessed with prophecy in this world. Not sure if anyone who cares will find many people who care about his or her interpretation.

Jon doing great things may impress people, but I'm reasonably confident that no one in the series is going to gape in awe when some knowledgeable character prattles on about the fulfillment of the promised prince prophecy...

1 hour ago, Jô Maltese said:

More importantly, whatever the outcome, I think the readers will need to know that Jon was the legitimate King at the closure of the books - even if he never was.

I don't think this can be known. Because the question who 'the legitimate king' would be after the overthrow of Aerys II is open to debate. There is no clear answer to that. Jon will either become king or he won't become king. But he'll never be 'the legitimate' or 'rightful' king because nobody really knows whether an younger son or the grandson of a king has the better claim - especially if the king himself actually named the younger son his heir.

[Not to mention Robert's usurpation and the Baratheon interregnum. Whether Westeros is going to ever accept a Targaryen monarch again is at this point not resolved. People don't think they lost their claims, but if they all died of a cold in the next chapter then we'll never know if they could have successfully pushed those claims.]

It is quite clear that only pretenders who have been crowned and anointed (or at least publicly proclaimed) king or queen actually are seen as monarchs. This even extends to such monarchs as Jaehaerys I (only a prince until his Oldtown coronation) and Aegon III (a prince until his KL coronation, with Cregan Stark actually serving as the Hand of a prince) whereas such 'rightful kings' as Aegon the Uncrowned or Aemond's son by Alys Rivers are not counted as kings. Lyanna's son would have been neither publicly proclaimed nor crowned or anointed king at that tower in the middle of nowhere.

This is not a fairy-tale. Kings in Westeros are made, they are not born. There are divine or sacred aspects to kingship in this world, but those are all part of very mundane rituals. And Jon Snow did not go through any of those.

[Jô Maltese]

5 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

(...) 

This is not a fairy-tale. Kings in Westeros are made, they are not born. There are divine or sacred aspects to kingship in this world, but those are all part of very mundane rituals. And Jon Snow did not go through any of those.

You are too assertive to bother about discussing our different interpretations of what is / how legitimacy works in the world of IaF or what may happen in the future books.

That said, your last sentence is a claim that many use to develop their theories and I strongly disagree: A Song of Ice and Fire is a fairy-tale, even if it is definitely not of the classical type (especially wrt the big happy ending). You have dragons, wolves, sorcerers and sorceresses, princesses in distress, unlikely heroes, a naughty Queen, ghosts / un-deads and arguably even some fairies (the CoTF, Quaithe). And more.

Mind you, rightful kings in Westeros are born, not made. Granted, some conquerors and rebels were successful in making themselves kings, but they then just started a new dynasty. I mean, come on, the whole story starts with this very fact: Joffrey is not Robert's son and therefore is not the Crown's legitimate heir. Yet, like you, I suspect the eventual King will be made, not born, but this is also a classic tale ingredient: the moral of the story...

[Lord Varys]

4 hours ago, Jô Maltese said:

You are too assertive to bother about discussing our different interpretations of what is / how legitimacy works in the world of IaF or what may happen in the future books.

Legitimacy has nothing to do with kingship. Kingship comes when you are proclaimed/crowned/anointed king. There has to be such an act/ceremony/ritual. Without that, you are not a king. That is made very evident in the books, both the main series and the history books.

If Jon Snow is proclaimed/crowned/anointed king, he can aspire to kingship in some way (whether he is going to be just a pretender remains to be seen), if not, then he won't be a king at all.

Even if Jon's birth and parentage are going to be cited as important reasons as to why he should be king when he is made king then this wouldn't make him 'the rightful king' retroactively. The idea that Rhaegar's only surviving king *became king* after the death of Aerys II seems to be an interpretation nobody in-universe seems to share - both because Aerys II had named another heir and because kings are made in this world, not born.

Robert Baratheon was king from 283-298 AC, Viserys III was crowned pretender challenging his claim, Joffrey and Tommen were/are crowned kings, Daenerys is a pretender queen right now, etc. But Prince Aegon is no king right now. He has a very strong claim (if he were truly Rhaegar's son) but unlike the others he has yet to be proclaimed/crowned/anointed king. Until that happens he is just a royal prince. And that's what 'Jon Snow' is, too, until such a time as he is proclaimed/crowned/anointed king.

4 hours ago, Jô Maltese said:

That said, your last sentence is a claim that many use to develop their theories and I strongly disagree: A Song of Ice and Fire is a fairy-tale, even if it is definitely not of the classical type (especially wrt the big happy ending). You have dragons, wolves, sorcerers and sorceresses, princesses in distress, unlikely heroes, a naughty Queen, ghosts / un-deads and arguably even some fairies (the CoTF, Quaithe). And more.

It is a modern fantasy series, not a fairy-tale. A fairy-tale doesn't care about a realistic depiction of politics. 

4 hours ago, Jô Maltese said:

Mind you, rightful kings in Westeros are born, not made. Granted, some conquerors and rebels were successful in making themselves kings, but they then just started a new dynasty. I mean, come on, the whole story starts with this very fact: Joffrey is not Robert's son and therefore is not the Crown's legitimate heir. Yet, like you, I suspect the eventual King will be made, not born, but this is also a classic tale ingredient: the moral of the story...

Joffrey and Tommen Baratheon might not be the biological sons of Robert Baratheon but they sure as hell are kings. They were proclaimed, crowned, and anointed kings. Kingship is established by such rituals and ceremonies. We can agree they should not be kings because they do not have single drop of Targaryen blood, apparently (although they do have a lot of Lannister blood, which is 'royal blood', too, but to a throne that has been defunct for 300 years) but that doesn't change the fact that they still were/are kings.

Just as Robb was a king to the men who did him homage - on the larger scale he was a pretender who failed but history is going to remember him as a man who claimed the title and style of king.

Aegon the Conqueror was not born a king yet he became the rightful king of six of the seven kingdoms anyway - by means of conquest and the conquered lords and people doing homage to him. He made himself into a king, he was not born in this way. It is the same with men like Benedict Justman, the first Teague king, etc.

Even if you have the royal blood - if you don't go through the rituals you are not a king. If you don't declare yourself king or nobody proclaims you king, nobody is going to call you king. You won't be a king. This is why 'rightful kings' like Aegon the Uncrowned are not, in fact, called kings. They were never crowned, so they never were kings, despite the fact that they should have been kings and aspired to kingship.

Jon Snow is not the character of a 'hidden king' or anything of that sort. He may get a skill set that may put him into a position to claim the mantle of king under certain conditions - mostly that people buy into the story of his true parentage or are willing to make use of Robb's last will (assuming it legitimized him as 'Jon Stark') - but he was not born as king.

That idea died with Aegon was introduced as a prince and not as 'King Aegon VI' in ADwD continued by the way royal folk is referred to in both TWoIaF and FaB.

[Jô Maltese]

20 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

(...)

Jon Snow is not the character of a 'hidden king'

(...)

Again, I do not want to spend much time in countering all your assertive interpretations of how things work in the world of IaF, you obviously know better than most as your 19000 posts or so show...

... But excuse my French (I am French), many of your posts mentioned above are full of shit, especially the last one highlighted above in my quote:  Jon Snow is the Hidden King, he is R+L, he is the PtwP, he is AA reborn, he is the Song of Ice and Fire. It is known.

[Lord Varys]

8 hours ago, Jô Maltese said:

Again, I do not want to spend much time in countering all your assertive interpretations of how things work in the world of IaF, you obviously know better than most as your 19000 posts or so show...

Look, I'm not interpreting here. I point to facts as to how kingship is depicted in those works. And there are no instances where kings just poof into existence after a previous king dies. Even the heirs of monarchs usually are named and anointed in special rituals. Just because you are the (eldest) child of a prince who is the son of a king you are not suddenly the king's heir when your father dies.

I don't make proclamations about the future of the series - as you do in the quote below - I merely point out how the kingship is actually dealt with in the books. And that's not just the case with Prince Aegon: Do you recall any instance where anyone speaks or thinks of Sansa Stark as the Queen in the North and Robb's heiress? This would be the case if kingship was more or less blindly transferred to the next in line, because with Brandon, Rickon, and Arya believed to be dead Sansa Stark is the successor of her royal brother.

If you look at history - both in the real world and in Westeros as far as we got it - then it is pretty easy what makes a monarch. He or she has to actually be proclaimed, crowned, and anointed and actually wield the royal that comes with the kingship he or she aspires to (i.e. in our context sit the Iron Throne for a time). A pretender is a person who is proclaimed monarch and even crowned or anointed but fails to actually acquire the power he or she aspires to (or fails to cling to it long enough to be counted as a true monarch - after FaB it is a tricky thing to decide whether Rhaenyra is a proper queen or merely a pretender). This is very obvious in the case of Stannis and Renly or the Blackfyre pretenders - they all went through some rituals making them kings (and the Blackfyres even passed on their claims to kingship to their descendants) but they never met all the criteria a proper king has to meet.

This is why Robert and Maegor the Cruel can be counted among the actual kings rather than the pretenders despite the fact that they never should have been kings considering they usurped the throne.

A claimant would be a person who has a claim to a throne but does or does not decide to try to push it. Pretty much anyone with so much as a drop of royal blood would have such a claim.

8 hours ago, Jô Maltese said:

... But excuse my French (I am French), many of your post mentioned above are full of shit, especially the last one highlighted above in my quote:  Jon Snow is the Hidden King, he is R+L, he is the PtwP, he is AA reborn, he is the Song of Ice and Fire. It is known.

That is just a baseless assertion at this point. This is not confirmed by the text as it is published today. Even if we were to agree that some of your points are correct here, then this would merely make Jon a hidden prince (and I agree that he is very likely a hidden prince), not a hidden king. A hidden king is pretty much a paradox considering that a huge part of being a king is to actually rule. Was Aegon II still 'the king' in a meaningful sense while he was hiding on Dragonstone and Rhaenyra sat the Iron Throne? I don't think so.

A person never being made king in any sense whatsoever cannot even be a king in the sense of Aegon II.

All the other prophecy stuff basically has nothing to do with any titles or functions. And I've to say that there is literally no reason to assume that 'the Song of Ice and Fire' is a person. The song of the promised prince is supposed to be the song of ice and fire, according to Rhaegar, and if one agrees with that then this actually makes it impossible for the song to be a person.

[Maia]

On 24 December 2018 at 7:28 PM, Frey family reunion said:

So how does Lyanna who has never participated in a tilt, who at most may have practiced as Dunk did, riding at a shield hanging from a shield:

Beat three experienced jousters?

How did Ser Glendon Flowers/Ball? According to his story he never tilted against another human until he arrived at Whitewalls. The old squire who taught him built him a quintain and that's what he trained with. I strongly suspect that Lyanna and Benjen nicked one from the castle, or had one made, stashed it in some abandoned hut in the woods and tilted at it during their frequent rides - and also at each other. 

[SirArthur]

18 hours ago, Jô Maltese said:

... But excuse my French (I am French), many of your post mentioned above are full of shit, especially the last one highlighted above in my quote:  Jon Snow is the Hidden King, he is R+L, he is the PtwP, he is AA reborn, he is the Song of Ice and Fire. It is known.

"No dragon," Irri said. "Brave men kill them, for dragon terrible evil beasts. It is known."

"It is known," agreed Jhiqui.

Just a personal question. Where do you get this "It is known" from ? Is this a youtube meme ? I have read it many times and each time a (hidden) Targaryen was styled as AA in the post. And finished with "It is known". Just like "amen". Can you explain ?

[Jô Maltese]

39 minutes ago, SirArthur said:

"No dragon," Irri said. "Brave men kill them, for dragon terrible evil beasts. It is known."

"It is known," agreed Jhiqui.

Just a personal question. Where do you get this "It is known" from ? Is this a youtube meme ? I have read it many times and each time a (hidden) Targaryen was styled as AA in the post. And finished with "It is known". Just like "amen". Can you explain ?

From your example and many similar assertions from Dothraki characters, especially Irri and Jhiqi. It's a kind of hommage to the books and - I confess it, a lazy way of cutting short a long argument about something you deeply believe to be the truth.

[JNR]

4 hours ago, Jô Maltese said:

From your example and many similar assertions from Dothraki characters, especially Irri and Jhiqi. It's a kind of hommage to the books and - I confess it, a lazy way of cutting short a long argument about something you deeply believe to be the truth.

Quote

 

"It is known," Irri agreed.

Dothraki were wise where horses were concerned, but could be utter fools about much else.

 

-- ADWD

[corbon]

On 12/21/2018 at 9:21 PM, Geddus said:

I think this is really forced and completely unnecessary, I prefer clueless Robert, but to each his own.

Why would Robert need to keep up a false narrative with Ned, who he thinks knows as much on the matter as himself (he's wrong, clearly, Ned knows more)? Unless you mean that Robert could have learned something in the years that passed since the rebellion, but it seems really unlikely to me: no one, not even Daenerys (who has heard the story from either Viserys or Darry, in any case surely not from a rebel), suggests anything other than a kidnapping by force. I don't think any other version of the events went around, ever - or at least, I can't find anything suggesting it did.

I also don't see where this reason to believe Robert knew something comes from, his fury at Rhaegar seems genuine and he doesn't strike me as someone willing or even capable of faking or concealing his feelings but as I said above, to each his own.

Robert needs to keep the false narrative up to himself, not to Ned.
Robert's entire life and world view since he killed Rhaegar can sort of be summed up as "woe is me, Rhaegar stole my woman and now I got a shitty replacement woman and a shitty job for a shitty life I do my best to ignore. If only I had Lyanna I'd have a great marriage and a great family and be a great King, its all his fault, not mine."
The truth is that Robert only 'loved' a fantasy version of Lyanna, who didn't love him back, and Robert's life is shitty because he never grew into a man, just indulged himself childishly.
The quote where Robert complains that "Rhaegar has Lyanna now" shows that underneath it all, Robert knows the truth, he just avoids facing it. The only way Rhaegar would 'have' Lyanna in death is if that was Lyanna's choice. So Robert actually knows this deep down. He just avoids facing it because doing so would force him to face the truth about himself too.

He is genuine in his anger and hatred of Rhaegar, because his whole 'I'm a good guy' self image is based on everything bad in his life for the last 15 years being Rhaegar's fault rather than his own. But that quote reveals that Robert knows that isn't the truth, even though he won't, can't, admit it even to himself.

On 12/22/2018 at 11:57 AM, Ser Leftwich said:

Concur that Robert was willfully clueless.

Yeah. The point is that this quote shows that it was wilful despite an underlying knowledge.

[corbon]

On 12/25/2018 at 7:28 AM, Frey family reunion said:

No, I think you’re really reaching here.  The point of the quote is that Dunc’s “Training” was clearly insufficient for him to think that he could win any joust:

In other words, not participating in tilts, and charging at a shield hanging from a tree is not a good substitute.

You are ignoring significant parts of your own quotes.

Quote

“You have not ridden in a tilt since Ashford Meadow, ser.”

Insolent boy. “I’ve trained.” Not as faithfully as he might have, to be sure. When he could, he took his turn riding at quintains or rings, where such were available. And sometimes he would command Egg to climb a tree and hang a shield or barrel stave beneath a well-placed limb for them to tilt at.

The point is not that riding at rings or shields/staves is insufficient training, the point is that Dunk didn't do even enough of that. And its particularly important for Dunk because he's not a good horseman, and as Jaime tells us, jousting is 3/4s horsemanship.  
 

Quote

So how does Lyanna who has never participated in a tilt, who at most may have practiced as Dunk did, riding at a shield hanging from a shield:

Beat three experienced jousters?

Lyanna beat three experienced and competent (after all, they'd beaten other knights already to become champions to be challenge-able)  jousters in a large part because...

Quote

Jousting was three-quarters horsemanship, Jaime had always believed. Ser Loras rode superbly, and handled a lance as if he'd been born holding one 

Quote

"Brandon was fostered at Barrowton with old Lord Dustin, the father of the one I'd later wed, but he spent most of his time riding the Rills. He loved to ride. His little sister took after him in that. A pair of centaurs, those two. 

Quote

Both horses were lathered and flagging by the time he came up beside her, reached over, and grabbed her bridle. Arya was breathing hard herself then. She knew the fight was done. "You ride like a northman, milady," Harwin said when he'd drawn them to a halt. "Your aunt was the same. Lady Lyanna. But my father was master of horse, remember."

Quote

"For the moment. I had another, once. Domeric. A quiet boy, but most accomplished. He served four years as Lady Dustin's page, and three in the Vale as a squire to Lord Redfort. He played the high harp, read histories, and rode like the wind. Horses … the boy was mad for horses, Lady Dustin will tell you. Not even Lord Rickard's daughter could outrace him, and that one was half a horse herself. Redfort said he showed great promise in the lists. A great jouster must be a great horseman first."

... she was a superb horsewoman, famous for it, and that is the primary requirement for jousters, at least in GRRM-world.

In my opinion any 'magic' from the old gods etc was primarily in having Lyanna as 'their champion' rather than anything overt. You are of course free to continue to believe in something more overt even where there is little to no evidence in the entire series of them 'acting' in any overt way. 
But to think that such is 'required' is to ignore what the text tells us. Repeatedly and explicitly.  
 

[Ygrain]

A little tidbit from Fire and Blood which came up on a different thread - sorry if it had been mentioned before:

Spoiler

• Lord Manderly entertained the queen lavishly. At the welcoming feast an entire aurochs was roasted, and his lordship’s daughter Jessamyn acted as the queen’s cupbearer, filling her tankard with a strong northern ale that Her Grace pronounced finer than any wine she had ever tasted. Manderly also staged a small tourney in the queen’s honor, to show the prowess of his knights. One of the fighters (though no knight) was revealed to be a woman, a wildling girl who had been captured by rangers north of the Wall and given to one of Lord Manderly’s household knights to foster. Delighted by the girl’s daring, Alysanne summoned her own sworn shield, Jonquil Darke, and the wildling and the Scarlet Shadow dueled spear against sword whilst the northmen roared in approval.

Sure, it says nothing about the amount of training the girl received or not, but it does tell something about "girls don't have the physique to joust" strawman.

 

 

[Frey family reunion]

9 hours ago, corbon said:

You are ignoring significant parts of your own quotes.

The point is not that riding at rings or shields/staves is insufficient training, the point is that Dunk didn't do even enough of that. And its particularly important for Dunk because he's not a good horseman, and as Jaime tells us, jousting is 3/4s horsemanship.  
 

Lyanna beat three experienced and competent (after all, they'd beaten other knights already to become champions to be challenge-able)  jousters in a large part because...

... she was a superb horsewoman, famous for it, and that is the primary requirement for jousters, at least in GRRM-world.

In my opinion any 'magic' from the old gods etc was primarily in having Lyanna as 'their champion' rather than anything overt. You are of course free to continue to believe in something more overt even where there is little to no evidence in the entire series of them 'acting' in any overt way. 
But to think that such is 'required' is to ignore what the text tells us. Repeatedly and explicitly.  
 

No, the point is that Egg hanging a shield from a tree isn’t really good substitute for formal training and experience in jousting.  Lyanna’s training wouldn’t consist of much more than what Dunk was doing.  Lyanna is known as being a good and enthusiastic rider (I think being famous as a superb horsewoman is a bit of hyperbole), but we don’t have anything from the story to tell us that Lyanna has been practicing for a joust.  Now of course things may change as the story churns along, and perhaps we’ll learn that Brandon taught her a thing or two while they were riding together at the Rills, but at this point we don’t even have that to rely on.

And your quote from Harwin is telling:

Quote

Both horses were lathered and flagging by the time he came up beside her, reached over, and grabbed her bridle. Arya was breathing hard herself then. She knew the fight was done. “You ride like a northman, milady,” Harwin said when he’d drawn them to a halt. “Your aunt was the same. Lady Lyanna. But my father was master of horse, remember.”

In other words, Arya and Lyanna were good riders, like a Northman, but Harwin is better because he was presumably trained by his father, who was master of horse.  Now how did Harwin do in a joust?

Quote

Alyn and Harwin fared less well; Harwin was unhorsed in his first tilt by Ser Meryn of the Kingsguard, while Alyn fell to Ser Balon Swann.

So in other words, while being a good horseman or horsewoman, is helpful, it’s certainly not enough to make someone a successful jouster.

Now the one thing we can take from the Ashford Tourney, and from the Whitewalls tourney and from the Hand’s tourney is that it’s not unknown for someone to cheat their way to a victory in these tourneys.

And in this case, the “Old Gods” may have lent a helping hand to the mystery knight:

Quote

“Whoever he was, the old gods gave strength to his arm.  The porcupine knight fell first, then the pitchfork knight, and lastly the knight of the two towers.

In other words, the Knight of the Laughing tree got an assist from the Old Gods.  And who better to give a magical assist, to the knight than the one who was trying to get revenge on the squires of these three knights?

Quote

“Once there was a curious lad who lived in the Neck. He was small like all crannogmen, but brave and smart and strong as well. He grew up hunting and fishing and climbing trees, and learned all the magics of my people.”

Quote

“No,” said Meera, “but he could breathe mud and run on leaves, and change earth to water and water to earth with no more than a whispered word. He could talk to trees and weave words and make castles appear and disappear.”

So when it came time to try and mete out vengeance on the three knights of the squires, Howland had to come up with a plan, because he knew he couldn’t ride in the joust himself,

Quote

‘I could find you a horse, and some armor that might fit,’ the pup offered. The little crannogman thanked him, but gave no answer. His heart was torn. Crannogmen are smaller than most, but just as proud. The lad was no knight, no more than any of his people. We sit a boat more often than a horse, and our hands are made for oars, not lances. Much as he wished to have his vengeance, he feared he would only make a fool of himself and shame his people. The quiet wolf had offered the little crannogman a place in his tent that night, but before he slept he knelt on the lakeshore, looking across the water to where the Isle of Faces would be, and said a prayer to the old gods of north and Neck …”

So in other words, Howland probably did take an active part in the knights’ comeuppance, but he did it with the help of Lyanna.  It’s fairly evident, to me at least, that they acted as a tandem.  Lyanna rode in the joust, but Howland’s magic, whether a glamor or some other magical trick, ensured that she’d beat the three more experienced, jousters.

After all, what do we know about Mudmen?

Quote

“We won’t find them,” the Frey boy said suddenly.  “Not so long as the frog eaters are with them.  Mudmen are sneaks, they won’t fight like decent folks, 

 

[corbon]

1 hour ago, Frey family reunion said:

No, the point is that Egg hanging a shield from a tree isn’t really good substitute for formal training and experience in jousting.

We have to agree to disagree. I don't personally think thats even a reasonable understanding of the subtext, but each to his own.

1 hour ago, Frey family reunion said:

 Lyanna’s training wouldn’t consist of much more than what Dunk was doing.  Lyanna is known as being a good and enthusiastic rider (I think being famous as a superb horsewoman is a bit of hyperbole),

I don't think being described as a centaur, and half horse, by two entirely different sources is without significant meaning. I think claims of "hyperbole" here are ... hyperbolic.  

1 hour ago, Frey family reunion said:

And your quote from Harwin is telling:

In other words, Arya and Lyanna were good riders, like a Northman, but Harwin is better because he was presumably trained by his father, who was master of horse.  Now how did Harwin do in a joust?

Not what I get from the scene. Harwin has self-expectations of being good, and is, relatively speaking, because of his father's station. Arya is quite good too, but she's not only not the horsewoman Lyanna was, she's only 10. 

1 hour ago, Frey family reunion said:

So in other words, while being a good horseman or horsewoman, is helpful, it’s certainly not enough to make someone a successful jouster.

Not enough, but a very significant portion, especially at the higher levels. At least 3x as important as everything else put together according to Jaime (who operates at the highest level), and critical ('must') at the higher levels according to Roose Bolton.
Dunk is not a good horseman. Or a good jouster. Taking notes from him, especially the early him with little experience and fewer skills other than being freakin huge and being able to take a hit, is not a good argument. 

1 hour ago, Frey family reunion said:

Now the one thing we can take from the Ashford Tourney, and from the Whitewalls tourney and from the Hand’s tourney is that it’s not unknown for someone to cheat their way to a victory in these tourneys.

And in this case, the “Old Gods” may have lent a helping hand to the mystery knight:

In other words, the Knight of the Laughing tree got an assist from the Old Gods.  And who better to give a magical assist, to the knight than the one who was trying to get revenge on the squires of these three knights?

So when it came time to try and mete out vengeance on the three knights of the squires, Howland had to come up with a plan, because he knew he couldn’t ride in the joust himself,

So in other words, Howland probably did take an active part in the knights’ comeuppance, but he did it with the help of Lyanna.  It’s fairly evident, to me at least, that they acted as a tandem.  Lyanna rode in the joust, but Howland’s magic, whether a glamor or some other magical trick, ensured that she’d beat the three more experienced, jousters.

After all, what do we know about Mudmen?

 

And here's where we part ways again. I accept this argument as a reasonable understanding of those parts of the text. I just don't agree with it as being likely. Each to his own, again.

This is why I don't believe this reading of the text is right, though understand yours as reasonable.
I don't see the Old Gods acting like this anywhere else in the text - if they are even there or active their 'help' is much subtler it seems to me - like guiding the Direwolf mother to where her pups could be found by the Starks (and providing those pups).
I see the 'mudmen' descriptions as being Andal superstitions. I think only their Greenseers have any actual 'magic', though Dreamers like Jojen are gifted 'Sight' (perhaps more of that 'subtle' help from the Old Gods, perhaps a more limited form of communing with the weirnet). The other mudmen "magics" are merely skills foreign to the rest of Westeros :

Quote

"The gods give many gifts, Bran. My sister is a hunter. It is given to her to run swiftly, and stand so still she seems to vanish. She has sharp ears, keen eyes, a steady hand with net and spear. She can breathe mud and fly through trees. I could not do these things, no more than you could. 

Quote

"No," said Meera, "but he could breathe mud and run on leaves, and change earth to water and water to earth with no more than a whispered word. He could talk to trees and weave words and make castles appear and disappear."

Meera's skills aren't magic, IMO. They are entirely mundane. She doesn't actually 'fly' through trees (or run on leaves), but is surefooted and swift and can leap from branch to branch tree to tree and appear to others to be flying through trees. Same for Howland, Same for 'vanishing', same for changing earth to water and water to earth with a whispered word (knowing trails through swamps and how to discern safe paths) or make castles appear and disappear (understanding the movements of the floating islands in the swamps and possibly camouflage). These are all mundane skills that appear magic to those who don't have them.

Thanks for the discussion.

 

[Frey family reunion]

1 hour ago, corbon said:

I don't think being described as a centaur, and half horse, by two entirely different sources is without significant meaning. I think claims of "hyperbole" here are ... hyperbolic.

Lady Dustin describes both Lyanna and Brandon as centaurs, and we’re never given any indication that Brandon was anything special as a jouster.  All we know is that Rhaegar beat him at the Harrenhal tourney.  I don’t think Lord Bolton was referring to Lyanna as half a horse, it doesn’t make any sense that she would have been riding against Domeric Bolton.  I think it’s much more probable that he was referring to Lord Rickard Karstark’s daughter, Alys.

[Frey family reunion]

1 hour ago, corbon said:

Same for Howland, Same for 'vanishing', same for changing earth to water and water to earth with a whispered word (knowing trails through swamps and how to discern safe paths) or make castles appear and disappear (understanding the movements of the floating islands in the swamps and possibly camouflage). These are all mundane skills that appear magic to those who don't have them.

I think you’re discounting Howland Reed at your peril.  After all if this tale is to be believed (and it seems unfair to believe the parts that fit your narrative and disbelieve the parts that don’t), Howland became embedded with the mysterious Green Men of the Isle of Faces.  If his skills were mundane before his stay there, they may not have been so mundane afterward.  After all, what do you think it means when it says he can talk to trees?  It seems highly probable that Howland, like Bran, and like Brynden, may be a greenseer.

[J. Stargaryen]

2 hours ago, Frey family reunion said:

I think you’re discounting Howland Reed at your peril.  After all if this tale is to be believed (and it seems unfair to believe the parts that fit your narrative and disbelieve the parts that don’t), Howland became embedded with the mysterious Green Men of the Isle of Faces.  If his skills were mundane before his stay there, they may not have been so mundane afterward.  After all, what do you think it means when it says he can talk to trees?  It seems highly probable that Howland, like Bran, and like Brynden, may be a greenseer.

Perhaps Howland slipped something extra in their drinks the night before. Maybe even a concoction that Howland had learned from "the old gods." Facing three hungover, or still drunk, knights would have certainly assisted Lyanna. I don't know if there's any evidence for it, but I suppose I wouldn't be shocked to learn that something like this happened.

[Bael's Bastard]

4 hours ago, J. Stargaryen said:

Perhaps Howland slipped something extra in their drinks the night before. Maybe even a concoction that Howland had learned from "the old gods." Facing three hungover, or still drunk, knights would have certainly assisted Lyanna. I don't know if there's any evidence for it, but I suppose I wouldn't be shocked to learn that something like this happened.

TKOTLT appeared late on the afternoon of the second day, while one of the knights became champion at the end of the first day, and the other two became champions on the morning of the second day. I would think they would have been in good enough shape to defeat challengers on the second day, until they faced TKOTLT. Aside from Lyanna's skill at riding, and her practice at tilting at rings, I wouldn't be surprised if she pulled something similar to what Loras pulled.