R+L=J v.165

[Ygrain]

Duel as a way of annulling marriage is certainly creative

Plus, it is a plausible motivation. However: it would imply that the marriage was not a secret, which in turn means the word of it would spread as Brandon would hardly keep his trap shut about it while explaining himself to Aerys, which, in turn, means that at least the KG and Varys would know about it, and who knows who else. So far, there has been no indication of people knowing that Rhaegar pulled an Aegon the Conqueror.

As for Brandon's conviction that Rhaegar was in KL, someone - sorry, people, I can't recall who you were! - pointed out intentional misdirection by Rhaegar himself, mirroring Cat's misdirection during Tyrion's abduction, and I must say it is currently at the top of my list of possible scenarios.

[Geddus]

9 hours ago, Alexis-something-Rose said:

And that's what Robert did, even though it seems he knew a lot more about the whole situation.

Does it? How? He's not a POV so we can't read his mind, but from the way he talks about it he seems convinced that it was a kidnapping. 

When the story of the abduction spread Robert was in the Vale, I doubt he could influence it in any way. As for why Brandon went to King's Landing instead of Dragonstone, maybe he was misinformed or maybe he wanted to address the King first, who knows.

[HexMachina]

Personally I think KL was just better logically/practically for Brandon to go to, saves finding a ship, closer than Dragonstone and it is still the royal seat, there is a reasonable chance Rhaegar could be there. And if not we’ll onwards to DS from there

[Alexis-something-Rose]

4 hours ago, Geddus said:

Does it? How? He's not a POV so we can't read his mind, but from the way he talks about it he seems convinced that it was a kidnapping. 

I'm only saying that the narrative changed and I'm alluding to this line;

"I was always strong . . . no one could stand before me, no one. How do you fight someone if you can't hit them?" Confused, the king shook his head. "Rhaegar . . . Rhaegar won, damn him. I killed him, Ned, I drove the spike right through that black armor into his black heart, and he died at my feet. They made up songs about it. Yet somehow he still won. He has Lyanna now, and I have her." (Eddard X, AGOT 39)

I don't know that he doesn't know more than the kidnapping and rape story. Rhaegar having Lyanna in death is a pretty large statement, I think. 

[Geddus]

What do you mean that the narrative changed? I always took that statement to mean that Lyanna is with Rhaegar because they're both dead, nothing more.

This is from AGoT, first Ned chapter:

Quote

The king touched her cheek, his fingers brushing across the rough stone as gently as if it were living flesh. "I vowed to kill Rhaegar for what he did to her."

 

Second Ned chapter:

Quote

"Nonetheless," Ned said, "the murder of children … it would be vile … unspeakable …"

"Unspeakable?" the king roared. "What Aerys did to your brother Brandon was unspeakable. The way your lord father died, that was unspeakable. And Rhaegar … how many times do you think he raped your sister? How many hundreds of times?" His voice had grown so loud that his horse whinnied nervously beneath him. The king jerked the reins hard, quieting the animal, and pointed an angry finger at Ned. "I will kill every Targaryen I can get my hands on, until they are as dead as their dragons, and then I will piss on their graves."

Ned knew better than to defy him when the wrath was on him. If the years had not quenched Robert's thirst for revenge, no words of his would help. "You can't get your hands on this one, can you?" he said quietly.

To me, Robert doesn't sound like someone who thinks it was consensual. And both times it's only him and Ned, so no reason to lie whatsoever.

[Lord Varys]

There are hints that the story grew in the telling and Rhaegar only became the Prince of Dragonstone in the true sense of the word during the writing process for TWoIaF/FaB. Only there did we learn that there were actual Targaryen Princes (and Princesses and Queens) of Dragonstone who actually resided their permanently rather than it being their old castle and 'Prince of Dragonstone' just an honorary title of the Heir Apparent (the Prince of Wales usually doesn't reside in Wales, either, as far as I know).

Back in the books all the tidbits we got on Rhaegar's life from before TWoIaF had him reside in KL. There he grew up with his parents (no hints that Aerys and Rhaella resided on Dragonstone while their father was king), there he trained, there he married, there he and Elia seemed to be when Prince Aegon was conceived in the night of the comet, there he was supposed to be when Brandon showed up.

Perhaps Brandon's silliness there now warrants further explanation. Perhaps George is going to give us one, perhaps not. Chances are not that bad, I'd think, considering that we have hardly the full story yet about Brandon and Rickard's demise or the reasoning behind all that. We don't even know yet why the hell Ethan Glover survived.

However, perhaps the explanation is just going to be that Rhaegar originally demanded the king's rule on the matter. If the whole thing was more a trial-by-combat thing - rather than a straight-out challenge for single combat (which is also possible in Westeros) then the man to grant or refuse that would have been King Aerys II, anyway, not just Rhaegar himself. Any crime laid at Rhaegar's feet would be dealt with by the king. So Brandon may have chosen to go to KL for that reason.

Going to Dragonstone would have been even more silly considering Brandon had neither army nor navy and Rhaegar most likely had his sworn swords and garrison in his castle there. He would have made a greater fool of himself on Dragonstone than Lord Rogar did when he showed up there.

However, there is no textual information whatsoever on the exact nature of the Lyanna-Rhaegar relationship. Their marriage can be widely known to all our characters. They might just not think or talk about it. Even Robert may know the truth - in his version it would have been a forced marriage, of course, with Rhaegar 'raping Lyanna into consent', etc. - there is no reason at this point to make a ruling on open/public marriage, secret marriage, consensual affair, rape and imprisonment, etc. because we don't have any good and detailed information on the nature of their relationship.

It is left carefully and deliberately obscure.

[Bael's Bastard]

50 minutes ago, Geddus said:

 I always took that statement to mean that Lyanna is with Rhaegar because they're both dead, nothing more.

I don't think that makes much sense.

Robert says that somehow "Rhaegar won" despite dying at his feet, and that "he has Lyanna now." Then a few Eddard chapters later Robert tells Ned "I will give Lyanna your love."

I am not suggesting we can completely reconstruct Robert's beliefs of the afterlife based on these statements, but they cast doubt on the idea that he is simply stating that they are both dead in other words.

I don't think this is evidence that Robert or the rest of the realm knew that Rhaegar and Lyanna had wed, but I do think it might indicate that Robert knew or suspected that his earlier narrative is not entirely accurate.

1 hour ago, Geddus said:

To me, Robert doesn't sound like someone who thinks it was consensual.

As you note, that is the second Eddard chapter, and it is a much different tone than Robert in the tenth or thirteenth Ned chapter.

1 hour ago, Geddus said:

And both times it's only him and Ned, so no reason to lie whatsoever.

The Robert of Ned's second chapter has every reason to keep up the narrative he has been telling himself and others for fifteen years. That doesn't mean he doesn't know or suspect a much different reality that his pride will not allow him to speak of openly. Furthermore, Ned is Lyanna brother, and his oldest friend, who he hasn't seen for a decade. For all we know, Ned might be partly responsible for the narrative Robert believes about Rhaegar, or has at least enabled him to keep on believing it without contradicting him.

Anyways, I think we have reason to believe that Robert might know or suspect that the relationship between Rhaegar and Lyanna wasn't entirely one sided and forced, which still doesn't change the fact that she was already promised to Robert, and that the relationship was likely without the consent of Lord Rickard Stark.

[Bael's Bastard]

9 hours ago, Ygrain said:

As for Brandon's conviction that Rhaegar was in KL, someone - sorry, people, I can't recall who you were! - pointed out intentional misdirection by Rhaegar himself, mirroring Cat's misdirection during Tyrion's abduction, and I must say it is currently at the top of my list of possible scenarios.

That would be me.

I think there are similarities and possible similarities between the two situations, though I acknowledge that similarities between situations doesn't necessarily mean that they played out in exactly the same way.

But I find most explanations for why Brandon went to King's Landing to be unreasonable.

And we have a clear example early in the series of an abduction, likely in the vicinity of where Lyanna was abducted, perhaps even the same exact location, where the abductor herself intentionally misleads everyone about where she is taking the abductee.

So, while I acknowledge things could have gone quite differently, I think we should at least consider the possibility that the scenes with Catelyn and Tyrion might be informative about at least some aspects of Rhaegar making off with Lyanna.

I also think the descriptions of Arya's and Sansa's experiences as part of the king's and Ned's party, in Sansa I, help explain how Rhaegar could have plausible abducted Lyanna even if she was traveling as part of Rickard's party heading south from Winterfell.

[Alexis-something-Rose]

5 hours ago, Geddus said:

What do you mean that the narrative changed?

I only meant that Robert as the winner of the war gets to have control of what's said or how it is said. The way he talks in the crypts and in the barrowlands about Rhaegar is different from the way he is talking about him in that line to Ned, which tells me he knows a different story. 

But you interpret it one way and I interpret it another.

[Geddus]

17 hours ago, Bael's Bastard said:

I am not suggesting we can completely reconstruct Robert's beliefs of the afterlife based on these statements, but they cast doubt on the idea that he is simply stating that they are both dead in other words.

I don't think this is evidence that Robert or the rest of the realm knew that Rhaegar and Lyanna had wed, but I do think it might indicate that Robert knew or suspected that his earlier narrative is not entirely accurate.

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

17 hours ago, Bael's Bastard said:

The Robert of Ned's second chapter has every reason to keep up the narrative he has been telling himself and others for fifteen years. That doesn't mean he doesn't know or suspect a much different reality that his pride will not allow him to speak of openly. Furthermore, Ned is Lyanna brother, and his oldest friend, who he hasn't seen for a decade. For all we know, Ned might be partly responsible for the narrative Robert believes about Rhaegar, or has at least enabled him to keep on believing it without contradicting him.

Anyways, I think we have reason to believe that Robert might know or suspect that the relationship between Rhaegar and Lyanna wasn't entirely one sided and forced, which still doesn't change the fact that she was already promised to Robert, and that the relationship was likely without the consent of Lord Rickard Stark.

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.

[Dorian Martell's son]

I just wanted to point out that this thread about Rhaegar and Lyanna being Jon's biological parents is over a year old. That has some kind of record 

[Ser Leftwich]

14 hours ago, 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.

SNIP

Doesn't someone mention that songs are still sung about how Rhaegar loved Lyanna? If so, Robert doesn't really control the narrative and is a little naive.

Also, for any specifics about Rhaegar, let alone Rhaegar/Lyanna, he could have asked Varys or Selmy or Jaime, but how could he possibly be bothered to do that.

Concur that Robert was willfully clueless.

[BRANDON GREYSTARK]

On ‎12‎/‎22‎/‎2017 at 8:34 AM, Faera said:

I'm very sorry if I came across that way, it wasn't my intention.

I'm neither invested nor do I particularly care about "the romantic version" of Rhaegar and Lyanna. The man was married with kids and ran off with a sixteen-year-old betrothed to another man, starting a chain of events that ignited a war with people who could have been his allies against his father. It is hard to see the romance in that.

I suppose a large part of it was Robert idealising Lyanna to an impossible degree after fifteen years of an unhappy life. Ned says that Robert didn't really know Lyanna and simply “saw her beauty” but it is almost possible that he’s also conveniently forgotten any traits about Lyanna that might have irked him. It isn’t about who Lyanna really was anymore — it’s what she represents. She’s the life he feels he lost out on. It is even sadder because as a reader I very much doubt marriage to Lyanna would have been as happy as he thinks it would.

Actually, Lyanna's "wildness" has always been a curiosity of mine. 

Personally, I've pondered for a bit now why Lyanna was so close to Harrenhal when Rhaegar nabbed her. Presumably, the reason she was in the Riverlands was to attend Brandon and Catelyn's wedding. I'm guessing she'd have been travelling on the Kingsroad yet Harrenhal is south-east of Riverrun and, if she was travelling from Winterfell (Also, why not go with Brandon?) or even from the Vale (Again, if she was visiting Ned and Robert in the Vale why not travel with Ned to the wedding?), her party would have missed the River Road turn-off... so, what gives? Was she travelling from the south (If so, why was she in the south?), from Harrenhal itself (Visiting a friend, maybe? Could Howland still have been studying on the Isle of Faces?), or did she detour for some other reason that may have had nothing to do with Rhaegar? Maybe I am over thinking it but it still feels odd. She must have been travelling with an escort so she presumably had some legitimate reason to be there.

The popular belief is that  Lyanna had ran off to be with Rhaegar . Lyanna could have been riding or going to the isle of the Faces .

[BRANDON GREYSTARK]

On ‎12‎/‎18‎/‎2018 at 6:33 AM, J. Stargaryen said:

Jaime always believed that jousting was three-quarters horsemanship. Perhaps Dunk was not a strong enough rider.

Wasn't that before he was beaten by Loras ?

[J. Stargaryen]

4 hours ago, BRANDON GREYSTARK said:

Wasn't that before he was beaten by Loras ?

It's from Jaime's second chapter in AFfC.

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 . . . which no doubt accounted for his mother's pinched expression. He puts the point just where he means to put it, and seems to have the balance of a cat. Perhaps it was not such a fluke that he unhorsed me. It was a shame that he would never have the chance to try the boy again. He left the whole men to their sport.

[Frey family reunion]

On 12/18/2018 at 10:27 AM, Bael's Bastard said:

Then you missed the point.

Dunk isn't portrayed as a particularly skilled rider or jouster in the first place, and as of the Whitewalls Tourney in 211 AC, Dunk hadn't ridden in a tilt since the Ashford Tourney in 209 AC, and he did not faithfully train at tilting between Ashfordin 209 AC and Whitewalls in 211 AC. He also had the misfortune of going up against a professional tourney knight in the first round.

Lyanna, on the other hand, is portrayed as an extremely skilled rider, and we are told in the app that she actually practiced at tilting at rings. This quote shows us some of the ways that Lyanna could have gotten away with practicing tilting at rings in secret in the event her father did not permit her to do so openly.

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:

Quote

“Why should I lose?” Dunk demanded.  Argrave and Ser Glendon had ridden to opposite ends of the lists. “It is not as if I face the Laughing Storm. Is there some knight here like to give me trouble?”

“Almost all of them, ser.”

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.

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

Now having said that, it doesn’t mean that Lyanna wasn’t the KOTLT.  She very well may have been.  In my opinion, it’s just evidence that if Lyanna was the KOTLT, then something else happened which allowed her to beat three jousters (presumably experienced) who ended the first two days of the tourney as the initial champions.  Presumably something to do with the Old Gods.

After all we get this tidbit in the story:

Quote

“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...”

Quote

“Whoever he was, the old gods gave strength to his arm.”

And finally this:

Quote

And so the little crannogman’s prayer was answered … by the green men, or the old gods, or the children of the forest, who can say?”

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:

Quote

The king was wroth, and even sent his son the dragon prince to seek the man, but all they ever found was his painted shield, hanging abandoned in a tree.

Beat three experienced jousters?

It makes me wonder if some magic, may have been afoot?  Something that might have affected the horses perhaps?  Lyanna, good on a horse, and perhaps having tilted at a shield hanging in a tree, could certainly at least may be experienced and talented enough to look the part, but what could ensure that she would beat three jousters who would have had more far more experience?

[Jô Maltese]

On 12/21/2018 at 3:25 PM, Dorian Martell's son said:

I just wanted to point out that this thread about Rhaegar and Lyanna being Jon's biological parents is over a year old. That has some kind of record 

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

 

On 12/20/2018 at 2:44 PM, Lord Varys said:

There are hints that the story grew in the telling and Rhaegar only became the Prince of Dragonstone in the true sense of the word during the writing process for TWoIaF/FaB. (...)

I am more inclined to think that the story grew in the telling of Rhaegar and Lyanna: not sure GRRM had them officially married initially. Hence the lack of clues in the early books and the Targs habits of bending the marriage rules in the later TWoIaF works. I now see Rhaegar having some of the Rogue Prince in him - and this was his doom.

[Lord Varys]

3 minutes ago, Jô Maltese said:

I am more inclined to think that the story grew in the telling of Rhaegar and Lyanna: not sure GRRM had them officially married initially. Hence the lack of clues in the early books and the Targs habits of bending the marriage rules in the later TWoIaF works. I now see Rhaegar having some of the Rogue Prince in him - and this was his doom.

There are not really any clues for a marriage in the newer books, either. The only clues we have point towards a romance between Rhaegar and Lyanna.

Aegon the Conqueror and his two sister-wives are there since AGoT.

George plays with the whole Rhaegar-Lyanna thing again and again in the Targaryen history - variations include Duncan/Jenny and the subsequent Baratheon rebellion, Jaehaerys and Alysanne eloping and their subsequent secret marriage, Prince Maegor and Alys Harroway and (possibly) King Aenys reaction to that, and, most notably in my opinion, the recent revelation about Prince Aemond's son by Alys Rivers, who turned to be his wife, apparently. We do know that King Aegon III prevailed against the first 'Jon Snow' born out of a romance which began at Harrenhal, so this is pretty significant.

If Alys Rivers is telling the truth and Aemond was her lord husband when he died then her son is the rightful heir to the Iron Throne and the true king of Westeros. The fact that he did not prevail is very interesting. Did Aegon III and his brother Viserys defeat him in battle? Was he murdered or died he before it could come to a battle (very unlikely if you ask me considering that the regents could have dealt with Alys Rivers if this story is supposed to go nowhere)? Was his claim somehow dismissed/ignored on the basis that there was no evidence for this marriage Alys talks about?

If the latter is the case - or if the latter causes the lords and knights of Westeros to not side with this bastard son - then this reflects very badly on Jon Snow's chances, too.

After all, Jon Snow was himself raised a bastard, and that stain is not going to disappear into thin air because people tell stories that he is a trueborn prince. Once a Snow, always a Snow. And unlike with Alys Rivers and her son both Jon's parents are dead. Jon will not even have his mother vouching for him. Other people claiming they know 'the truth' should lead pretty much nowhere, or does anybody think that some guy from Hull claiming that Laenor Velaryon fathered Marilda's children would have caused Rhaenyra to buy that story and legitimize the boys? I don't think so.

The words of Howland Reed, Wylla, or whoever else might be still around as an eyewitness connecting 'Jon Snow' to Lyanna's child shouldn't help Jon Snow's claim at all. At least not if actually powerful/influential people don't buy it.

[Jô Maltese]

33 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

SNIP

As always with your wayward answers, I'm not sure we disagree here milord, although there are some hints at Rhaegar and Lyanna being married in the later ASoIaF books, you'll find plenty in the previous 164 threads...

As for 

33 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

We do know that King Aegon III prevailed against the first 'Jon Snow' born out of a romance which began at Harrenhal, so this is pretty significant.

If Alys Rivers is telling the truth and Aemond was her lord husband when he died then her son is the rightful heir to the Iron Throne and the true king of Westeros. (...) Was his claim somehow dismissed/ignored on the basis that there was no evidence for this marriage Alys talks about?

If the latter is the case - or if the latter causes the lords and knights of Westeros to not side with this bastard son - then this reflects very badly on Jon Snow's chances, too.

This is why many think (including me) that there is an official and unquestionable proof / witness of their marriage... Although I don't think Jon will end up on the Throne - I don't even think he will want to claim his birthright.

[Lord Varys]

11 minutes ago, Jô Maltese said:

As always with your wayward answers, I'm not sure we disagree here milord, although there are some hints at Rhaegar and Lyanna being married in the later ASoIaF books, you'll find plenty in the previous 164 threads...

I think insofar as we talk about real clues - clues the type we get for actual conspiracies and plots and the like - I think there are clues to a romance there (although of the same vague/contradicting/strange clues to romances we get throughout George's first novel, Dying of the Light.

If you want a template for the Rhaegar-Lyanna thing then the complicated relationships in that book is really an eyeopener (that also goes for the complex Tully-Littlefinger relationship), and this makes it very likely that there are multiple layers to this relationship George has not yet even hinted at at this point.

11 minutes ago, Jô Maltese said:

This is why many think (including me) that there is an official and unquestionable proof / witness of their marriage... Although I don't think Jon will end up on the Throne - I don't even think he will want to claim his birthright.

If there was a secret wedding then no such proof would exist. Words are winds, and it doesn't matter whether it is spoken or written words. But I honestly don't think the wedding as such is that much of an issue - I don't think it is that unlikely that Rhaegar and Lyanna did marry publicly and the King Aerys II was even less forgiven than King Aenys was to Maegor.

The real issue is the impossibility to provide an actual link between Rhaegar-Lyanna and 'Jon Snow'. All evidence/proof that's to be had there would be the testimony of Howland and Wylla - but depending on what they know they cannot really confirm that Rhaegar is actually the father of 'Jon Snow', only that Lyanna apparently believed this was the case (or that Ned told them that Lyanna told him that this was the case - assuming neither of them had a chance to talk (much) with Lyanna).

Do we have any reason to believe that Howland and Wylla will be widely seen as more credible than Stannis Baratheon or the agents spreading rumors about Selyse and Patchface? I don't think so.

As far as we know at this point there is no living person around who accompanied Rhaegar/Lyanna throughout the entire 'abduction period'. Richard Lonmouth could have witnessed a lot of things, but even he seems to have been no longer there when Ned came.

If Jon were not to end up on the throne then Aemond and Alys' son could be seen as a huge hint in that direction. After all, he didn't end up there, either.