R+L=J v.166

[Frey family reunion]

4 hours ago, SFDanny said:

The author has made this clear. I'll have to think on if there are any explicit reference to the Rhaegar/Martell brother split after he takes Lyanna, but it is very clear it exists in Martin's remarks.

As important as this is about how the Martell's reacted to Rhaegar's "treatment of Elia" we cannot forget the fundamental dangers the Lyanna affair plays with Dornish ambitions. It raises the question of if Rhaegar will put Elia aside when he reaches the throne. It raises the question if Rhaegar will follow custom and have Aegon as his heir or have a child of Lyanna succeed him to the throne. The Martells have every reason to be concerned about these questions, even if Elia herself is not. Of course, all of those concerns regarding a future under Rhaegar's rule come to naught with Robert's hammer blow on the Trident and Tywin's murders in King's Landing.

Look carefully at Martin’s quote.  You’ve interpreted it to mean that he’s referring to the Martell’s reaction to Rhaegar’s treatment of Elia, but that’s not what it says.  It says the Dornishmen did not support him as strongly as they might have.  And that’s unquestionably true.  Dorne as a whole would not be aware of Rhaegar’s beliefs in the Prince that was Promised etc.  The Dornish people would have assumed that Rhaegar had set aside Elia after hearing of the events at Harrenhal and then Lyanna’s subsequent “abduction”.  So even if Doran understood the underlying motives behind Rhaegar’s interest in Lyanna (which is a big if, I agree) and even if he approved of Rhaegar’s actions (an even bigger if, I agree) the Dornish people would not have.  

And Doran as a leader of the Dornish people is going to be very aware of their sentiment of what’s happening.  For Dorne, under these circumstances, supporting Rhaegar and going to war for Rhaegar is going to be extremely unpopular.  Combine that with his ordinarily cautious nature, and this explains why Dorne, specifically Doran, was so reticent to get involved.

But to argue that Rhaegar made a complete split with his wife and her family, specifically Lewyn, in his obsession with Lyanna, I’m not sure that’s supported at all.  

Assuming that Rhaegar’s conversation with Elia in the HOTU visions takes place after Harrenhal (and admittedly I’m very confused about the sequence of events) there doesn’t appear to be any significant split over Rhaegar crowning Lyanna. Then we have to figure out who were the six people who rode off with Rhaegar on the journey that would ultimately lead to Lyanna’s “abduction”.

The World Book gives us a pretty clear idea, who Rheagar’s confidants were.  Myles Mooton, Richard Lonmouth, Jon Connington, Arthur Dayne, and Lewyn Martell.  If we add Oswell Whent based on Oswell being entrusted by Rhaegar to set up the Harrenhal tourney, and Oswell’s later appearance at the tower of joy, then we get the six likeliest candidates to have ridden out with Rhaegar on the journey that led to Lyanna’s abduction.

In which case, it would seem to be odd that Rhaegar was abducting Lyanna to set aside Elia and then take Elia’s uncle along to help abduct her.

But let’s assume for an instant that you are correct.  That the Martells had a significant split with Rhaegar due to Rhaegar’s sudden interest in Lyanna.  Then it goes back to the incongruity of Rhaegar deciding to hide Lyanna in the Prince’s Pass in a lightly defended watchtower.  Basically putting his mistress directly in the path of his angry brother in law’s army.  

Lyanna in the tower of joy scenario, only really works if the tower was only a temporary stopping point born out of necessity.  In other words, the Kingsguards were taking Lyanna through the Prince’s pass but had to stop due to a complication of Lyanna’s pregnancy, or perhaps just the fact that Lyanna started going into labor.  In other words, kind of like the ASOIAF’s version of the Bethleham manger.  The problem with that scenario is that Rhaegar names the tower the tower of joy.  I don’t know if Rhaegar would have been in the position to know about the tower, in this scenario.  But I suppose it’s certainly possible.  However, it doesn’t address, in my mind at least, why Eddard would travel to Starfall after the battle.  (it doesn’t also really address why there would have been a bed in the tower either).

[SFDanny]

12 hours ago, Frey family reunion said:

Look carefully at Martin’s quote.  You’ve interpreted it to mean that he’s referring to the Martell’s reaction to Rhaegar’s treatment of Elia, but that’s not what it says.  It says the Dornishmen did not support him as strongly as they might have.  And that’s unquestionably true.  Dorne as a whole would not be aware of Rhaegar’s beliefs in the Prince that was Promised etc.  The Dornish people would have assumed that Rhaegar had set aside Elia after hearing of the events at Harrenhal and then Lyanna’s subsequent “abduction”.  So even if Doran understood the underlying motives behind Rhaegar’s interest in Lyanna (which is a big if, I agree) and even if he approved of Rhaegar’s actions (an even bigger if, I agree) the Dornish people would not have.  

And Doran as a leader of the Dornish people is going to be very aware of their sentiment of what’s happening.  For Dorne, under these circumstances, supporting Rhaegar and going to war for Rhaegar is going to be extremely unpopular.  Combine that with his ordinarily cautious nature, and this explains why Dorne, specifically Doran, was so reticent to get involved.

I have many times, and I think it takes some fairly large distortion of the quote to claim Martin is talking about the Dornish people or even the Dornish troops. But here again is the quote:

Quote

Ned's army did not accompany him to Dorne, no. There were no battles in Dorne during Robert's Rebellion, though doubtless there were minor skirmishes along the borders. But it's not entirely correct that the Martells stayed out of the war. Rhaegar had Dornish troops with him on the Trident, under the command of Prince Lewyn of the Kingsguard. However, the Dornishmen did not support him as strongly as they might have, in part because of anger at his treatment of Elia, in part because of Prince Doran's innate caution.

The Dornishmen who have "anger at his treatment of Elia" are referenced as "the Martells" two sentences before. The is no discussion of the anger of the Dornish people towards anyone. Not that that could not have existed as well, but Martin is speaking about decisions made by Doran Martell, and presumably with his brother Oberyn's counsel. Does that include Prince Lewyn in the "Martells"? We cannot be sure. It is Doran who makes the decisions, as the effect of his "innate caution" shows.

The problem here, however, goes deeper than that. The Martells have made a marriage pact with Aerys, and that includes certain expectations. It means they expect Elia will be the queen of Westeros someday, and that little Aegon will become the king when his father and Aerys dies. Aerys shows his power after the Trident to frustrate those expectations by naming Viserys his heir after Rhaegar's death. But the expectations have been there since at least when the marriage pact was negotiated. When Rhaegar runs off Lyanna, all those expectations are called into question. Not just by the King's madness and threats, but because of Rhaegar's actions. The idea that the Martells would accept this change without protest is fantasy, and I don't mean that in a good way. This is the "game of thrones" in action with each faction fighting for their candidate for power, and new factions coming into being when things change.

It would be interesting to read a history of the politics of this period and see just how many alliances are broken and formed among the many Houses of Westeros. The one thing we can be sure of is that the history would not be short. The politics here can change overnight.

12 hours ago, Frey family reunion said:

But to argue that Rhaegar made a complete split with his wife and her family, specifically Lewyn, in his obsession with Lyanna, I’m not sure that’s supported at all.

I've never argue this view. There is a huge difference between "anger" and a "complete split." What I have argued, and continued to do so, I that when Rhaegar takes Lyanna away into hiding that the Martell's ambitions and concerns no longer completely aligned. It is no longer a sure thing to expose Rhaegar's and Lyanna's hiding place to the Martell, including Prince Lewyn, and expect that hideaway to remain hidden. For Doran Martell it would be much better if Lyanna was in Aerys's hands as a hostage, rather than off together with the Crown Prince possibly making plans to replace Elia and Aegon. That is just common sense.

12 hours ago, Frey family reunion said:

Assuming that Rhaegar’s conversation with Elia in the HOTU visions takes place after Harrenhal (and admittedly I’m very confused about the sequence of events) there doesn’t appear to be any significant split over Rhaegar crowning Lyanna. Then we have to figure out who were the six people who rode off with Rhaegar on the journey that would ultimately lead to Lyanna’s “abduction”.

The World Book gives us a pretty clear idea, who Rheagar’s confidants were.  Myles Mooton, Richard Lonmouth, Jon Connington, Arthur Dayne, and Lewyn Martell.  If we add Oswell Whent based on Oswell being entrusted by Rhaegar to set up the Harrenhal tourney, and Oswell’s later appearance at the tower of joy, then we get the six likeliest candidates to have ridden out with Rhaegar on the journey that led to Lyanna’s abduction.

In which case, it would seem to be odd that Rhaegar was abducting Lyanna to set aside Elia and then take Elia’s uncle along to help abduct her.

First, you are right about the sequence. Aegon has not been born yet when Rhaegar crowns Lyanna at the Harrenhal tourney. His birth is likely the last month of 281 AC with the tourney probably a good guess to be two months before the birth.

The app tells us who was with Rhaegar during the "abduction." It names only Ser Arthur Dayne and Ser Oswell Whent as his companions during the kidnapping. I know you don't accept this information but I don't see any reason to doubt it. Because six companions set out with Rhaegar does not mean the same six stay with him through his travels. Nor does a list of prominent Rhaegar supporters at court mean they are the six who set out with the Prince.

As to your last sentence, I've never argued that view. My view is this was a "rescue" from an unwanted marriage that comes out of a chance meeting of Rhaegar on the road or, perhaps at the Inn at the Crossroads. My guess is that Rhaegar sets out with his six companions in search of an entirely different woman - the Ghost of High Heart. I think it likely that after the news from the doctors of Elia's health following Aegon's birth that Rhaegar is looking for her guidance. I have no idea if he ever found her, and as I say it is only my guess. I too think if Prince Lewyn was in the party, it would place him in a difficult position, but we have nothing to say he was there.

13 hours ago, Frey family reunion said:

But let’s assume for an instant that you are correct.  That the Martells had a significant split with Rhaegar due to Rhaegar’s sudden interest in Lyanna.  Then it goes back to the incongruity of Rhaegar deciding to hide Lyanna in the Prince’s Pass in a lightly defended watchtower.  Basically putting his mistress directly in the path of his angry brother in law’s army.  

Lyanna in the tower of joy scenario, only really works if the tower was only a temporary stopping point born out of necessity.  In other words, the Kingsguards were taking Lyanna through the Prince’s pass but had to stop due to a complication of Lyanna’s pregnancy, or perhaps just the fact that Lyanna started going into labor.  In other words, kind of like the ASOIAF’s version of the Bethleham manger.  The problem with that scenario is that Rhaegar names the tower the tower of joy.  I don’t know if Rhaegar would have been in the position to know about the tower, in this scenario.  But I suppose it’s certainly possible.  However, it doesn’t address, in my mind at least, why Eddard would travel to Starfall after the battle.  (it doesn’t also really address why there would have been a bed in the tower either).

Again we have a very different view of what the Tower of Joy looked like and most importantly it location relative to the Prince's Pass. If one is traveling the road in the Pass itself, as many travelers do, they shouldn't be able to see an abandon old broken down watchtower overlooking the pass. This is a remote tower with little to no traffic, not a stop on the main road. The people that the occupants of the tower of joy need worry about are those in the employ of local lord/lady or landed knight who might have responsibilities to check on the tower once in a blue moon. If that local lord/lady or landed knight is a trusted part of Rhaegar's faction then it lessens the danger of being found considerably. 

I think I've given you the reason I think, and many think Ned chose to travel to Starfall. He needs to cover his tracks. For some reason he thinks the Daynes will help him accomplish what he is doing with Jon. It certainly looks like he was right in those expectations. Which leaves me to again mention my guess that Ashara accompanied them from the Tower of Joy to Starfall and smoothed their way or Ned had reason to trust she would help him cover Jon's origins.

[JRRStark]

On 3/14/2019 at 8:01 PM, Ygrain said:

Most likely. But due to the promise, he had to.

But we don't know what the promise was.

[Ygrain]

2 hours ago, JRRStark said:

But we don't know what the promise was.

He made several promises, the content of which is not explicitely stated. What is explicitely stated is that Lyanna wanted to be buried at Winterfell, so that's a wish that Ned apparently granted.

[Frey family reunion]

5 hours ago, SFDanny said:

The Dornishmen who have "anger at his treatment of Elia" are referenced as "the Martells" two sentences before. The is no discussion of the anger of the Dornish people towards anyone. Not that that could not have existed as well, but Martin is speaking about decisions made by Doran Martell, and presumably with his brother Oberyn's counsel. Does that include Prince Lewyn in the "Martells"? We cannot be sure. It is Doran who makes the decisions, as the effect of his "innate caution" shows.

The Martells are referenced two sentences before, yet the Dornish troops are referenced one sentence before, so why couldn't Martin be referring to the Dornish troops' anger over Elia's treatment as opposed to the Martells?  For that matter, GRRM could have specified that it was the Martell's anger over Rhaegar's treatment of Elia, but he doesn't.  He uses the more general term "Dornishmen".  Now Dornishmen can refer to the Dornish troops, and the Martells, and generally refer to the people of Dorne.  Or Dornishmen could be just the Dornish troops but not the Martells.  

I think GRRM is being purposely vague here for a reason.  He doesn't necessarily want to be that specific.  If he meant House Martell, I think he would have stated the Martells's anger over the treatment of Elia, and Doran's own cautiousness were the two factors that muted Dorne's initial response to the rebellion.  But nope he chooses not to.  Regardless, you are acting like Doran and the Martells can be separated from the wishes and feelings of the Dornish people.  But as we're made aware of in AFFC and ADWD, Doran is painfully aware of the overriding sentiment of the people of his nation.  So if Dorne as a whole were angry over Rhaegar's treatment of Elia, than that would certainly be a factor in Doran being reticent to commit troops to the war.

But regardless it doesn't change my initial argument, that Starfall is a much more likely place to have put Elia than an old abandoned watchtower in a mountain pass, who's primary purpose during wartime is passage of troops to and from Dorne.

If Doran was angry at Rhaegar's treatment of Elia over Rhaegar's interest in Lyanna, then it seems completely loopy to put her in an old abandoned, broken (your words) lightly defended watchtower, where Doran Martells's army would pass back and forth.  Or to put Lyanna in the lands and control of House Fowler, one of the Martell's strongest allies in Dorne.

It would be much more probable that Lyanna would be in Starfall, though while in Dorne, it is certainly remote enough and protected enough from the mountains to be hidden from Doran's view.  And while there could be a danger of word leaking out (assuming the people in the castle actually know who Lyanna is) I think the danger is being overstated.  The people in the castle are either Daynes, their knights, or their servants, or the immediate family of their knights and servants.  Everyone has a vested interest in Starfall not being burned to the ground by Robert Baratheon.  We're not talking about a city, or even a town, this is a lone castle on an island in the mountains.  

Of course there is a risk to Lord Dayne, I would even argue a tremendous risk, but to say that he would refuse a request from Rhaegar or more significantly a request from Lord Dayne's brother, the Sword of the Morning, unquestionably Starfall's favorite and most influential "son", I would disagree.

Nor do I find the argument that Rhaegar would not have put Lord Dayne in that position compelling.  Please.  We are acting like we really know Rhaegar and what he would do and wouldn't do.  If Rhaegar were such a fine and upstanding man, you would assume that he wouldn't take a 15 or 16 year old girl and hide her from her family, hiding her pregnancy from her family, and thus risking the outbreak of a war that is going to cause numerous deaths and suffering throughout the land, but here we are.

My opinion is that Rhaegar's actions are influenced by the Prince that Was Promised prophecy, and the prophecy of bleeding stars, and being reborn in smoke and salt.  In other words, prophecies that are directly tied to the coming of a Long Night and a savior needed to win the battle for the dawn.  The same sacrifices he makes with his own kingdom, the same sacrifices he makes in risking war, and hiding a young girl, so she gives birth to someone integral in Rhaegar's plans, are the same sacrifices that would lead him to secrete her in Starfall so she and more importantly her unborn child can be properly cared for.

5 hours ago, SFDanny said:

Again we have a very different view of what the Tower of Joy looked like and most importantly it location relative to the Prince's Pass. If one is traveling the road in the Pass itself, as many travelers do, they shouldn't be able to see an abandon old broken down watchtower overlooking the pass. This is a remote tower with little to no traffic, not a stop on the main road. The people that the occupants of the tower of joy need worry about are those in the employ of local lord/lady or landed knight who might have responsibilities to check on the tower once in a blue moon. If that local lord/lady or landed knight is a trusted part of Rhaegar's faction then it lessens the danger of being found considerably. 

It seems that you are making as many assumptions as I am, perhaps even more.  But in reply to your argument, an abandoned old broken down watchtower is not suitable accommodations for a pregnant girl for an extended period of time.  Not if one is all concerned about her health, or the health of the child.  Nor can it be suitably defended.  But the other problem is that the Pass is where Doran gathers his army.  They don't just move through the pass, because of Doran's cautious nature, they actually stay in the Pass, and live there for a time.  To argue that no one would check out this tower, especially if there are signs that it's being manned, (and don't we have knights of the Kingsguard gaurding Lyanna under the your theory?) is unrealistic.  

Even if the army was just moving through it seems naive to think that no one would observe any knights about this tower, and go check it out.  So not only would Rhaegar risk someone discovering Lyanna, but perish the thought, he would risk Lyanna being discovered and raped by horny Dornishmen in the army.  Something that frequently happens during war time.  Heck maybe that's why Jon is so dark complected, his father is really a salty Dornish soldier .

5 hours ago, SFDanny said:

I think I've given you the reason I think, and many think Ned chose to travel to Starfall. He needs to cover his tracks. For some reason he thinks the Daynes will help him accomplish what he is doing with Jon. It certainly looks like he was right in those expectations. Which leaves me to again mention my guess that Ashara accompanied them from the Tower of Joy to Starfall and smoothed their way or Ned had reason to trust she would help him cover Jon's origins.

But the problem is traveling to Starfall doesn't really cover Ned's tracks does it?  It would make more sense if Ned claimed that Jon was Ashara's son.  So he then goes to Starfall to explain where he got Jon.  But he doesn't.  In fact travelling to Starfall just causes Ned to come up with another story, that he was returning Arthur's sword to Starfall.  It also causes the rumor and speculation apparently, that Jon is Ashara's son, a rumor that really seems to anger Ned.

I also don't think that covering his tracks would be a very compelling reason for Ned to risk a trip to Starfall.  Especially if he had a baby in tow.  It seems a ridiculous unnecessary risk.  

There is only one reason in my mind, that Ned would travel to Starfall with a baby.  And the only reason is that Ned is trying to return the baby to his mother.

[corbon]

On 3/17/2019 at 1:30 AM, alienarea said:

I haven't read any good explanation why Arthur Dayne's body ended up in a cairn at the ToJ and was not brought to his family at Starfall where Ned is riding to next to return Arthur's sword.

It just doesn't make sense to me.

Why would Ned carry a stinking, decomposing body across the mountains? 
Soldiers die in war. It is not expected to return all their remains home to their families when they die in battle. The only times we see remains being returned to families are those of noncombatants, hostages or prisoners - ie not killed through combat - and almost always as part of a negotiation or a gesture of attempted reconciliation.
The one exception is Lewyn Martell, who died in battle. Jon Arryn returned his remains to Dorne - when he went there to negotiate the Dornish acceptance of King Robert's reign.

On 3/17/2019 at 1:30 AM, alienarea said:

Also, if I were the Dayne family and Arthur was the best fighter in Westeros at that time, plus he was wielding Dawn, and neither Ned nor any of his friends was known as an exceptional fighter, it might have questioned whether Arthur died in a fight or wasn't shot with an arrow. Showing a body might clarify that.

Who really cares how he died though? The supposed killer is honourably returning the sword, when he has no need to do so. Isn't that enough of a clue?

On 3/17/2019 at 1:30 AM, alienarea said:

Ned is held in Honor by the Daynes despite killing Arthur, it cannot be only because he returned Dawn, can it?

(see about 2/3 of the way down)

Have a think about how important Dawn must be for the Daynes...

[SFDanny]

8 hours ago, corbon said:

Have a think about how important Dawn must be for the Daynes...

@alienarea I have no doubt @corbon is right and Dawn is a fundamental part of House Dayne's identity. It is a sacred trust handed down through the generations of Daynes. But I would only add I think there is more going on here than its return, as important as that is.

When Ned returns the sword Ashara is still alive. i believe Ashara had to have some connection to the hiding of Lyanna at the Tower of Joy and and possibly supplying it for months. Even if Ashara is not at the Tower when Lyanna dies and is not part of the "they" who find Ned holding her body, there is a likely connection to her brother as part of the conspiracy to hide Lady Stark and aid Rhaegar in his plans. As such, Ashara is one of the few people who knows the truth of what happened there. When the Daynes accept Dawn back, and accept Wylla into their household they participate in the cover up of who Jon really is. Conspiring to hide a child of Rhaegar, and possibly an heir of Rhaegar is treason to the new regime in King's Landing. So why are they so friendly to Ned? Because they know about Jon and make his hiding of who Jon is possible. It really doesn't work without their support.

So, think of it like this. The king you support and whose family you have supported for over a hundred years, and whom your family has married into, dies is a civil war against people you have no real contact with, and at the very last of the bloodshed one of the leaders of the rebellion against your King and his family shows up on your doorstep not only with the ancestral sword that represents what your family is all about for thousands of years but he offers to give it back, and is willing to commit treason to his new king by hiding the Crown Prince's last remaining child from death, then what would you do? Obviously, they said yes to Ned, and helped Ned hide the secret of who Jon is.

The simple reality is, I think, that the Daynes have taken into their home a woman who says she is the mother of Jon Snow, and at the same time they say Ashara committed suicide for the love of Ned, or maybe the loss of Jon, and we know Ned and his friends killed Ser Arthur. Something of larger nature than just getting Dawn back is behind their actions. They could have taken the sword and kicked Wylla out. They could have taken the sword and shown unending hatred for Ned Stark. The didn't do any of those things.

[Ygrain]

Also, the trip to Starfall may have been part of Ned's plan to muddy the waters around Jon's origin. He needs to put the distance, both in time and in place, between Lyanna's death and the appearance of a newborn. That is best done if he and the newborn are not seen together by people who might start counting. With the pretext of returning Dawn, Ned sets out to a place where he can find a ship to travel back to KL to report to Robert, while sending Howland North with baby Jon. Thus, Ned is seen by everyone and their mother in KL without a baby, and the first time anyone in the South hears about Jon in Winterfell, it's months (or years) later. The difference in time and space is now established, and outside Winterfell, no-one really knows how old Jon was or when he arrived.

[Bael's Bastard]

Call it simplistic, but I suspect Wylla was/is a Dornishwoman from Wyl. I might even suggest that Wyl of Winterfell was her son  perhaps hostage to her silence.

[SFDanny]

3 hours ago, Bael's Bastard said:

Call it simplistic, but I suspect Wylla was/is a Dornishwoman from Wyl. I might even suggest that Wyl of Winterfell was her son  perhaps hostage to her silence.

I believe Martin is going to tie up the false leads about who is Jon's mom. That means letting us know about Ashara and Wylla in whatever role they play in Jon's origin story. I doubt they will play no role, although I'm convinced Lyanna is his mother. But concerning Wylla, I think she will tell us the beginnings of two false trails. I think she is almost certainly a wet nurse at the Tower of Joy, but I also think she is the Fisherman's Daughter that Davos finds out about from Lord Godric. My guess is that the Fisherman's Daughter's tale is a cover story for those who check back on Wylla's birth and childhood. It also gives a plausible way of Wylla getting to know Ned in the early days of the war. Someone he could therefore have met when he wasn't surrounded by troops and other rebel commanders. Wylla's name certainly could point to Dorne and Wyl, but in this case I think it points to the White Harbor region and Wylla Manderly. A Fisherman's Daughter who is named after the Local lord's family like we have seen done in many places, and somehow ends up in Dorne as a wet nurse waiting on the birth of Lyanna's child. A woman of the small folk who plays a pivotal role in hiding who Jon really is, and whose beginnings becomes of intense interest to those who doubt Ned Stark's story.

Your's is simpler, and therefore maybe better, but I'm kinda tied to my guess.

[Bael's Bastard]

19 minutes ago, SFDanny said:

I believe Martin is going to tie up the false leads about who is Jon's mom. That means letting us know about Ashara and Wylla in whatever role they play in Jon's origin story. I doubt they will play no role, although I'm convinced Lyanna is his mother. But concerning Wylla, I think she will tell us the beginnings of two false trails. I think she is almost certainly a wet nurse at the Tower of Joy, but I also think she is the Fisherman's Daughter that Davos finds out about from Lord Godric. My guess is that the Fisherman's Daughter's tale is a cover story for those who check back on Wylla's birth and childhood. It also gives a plausible way of Wylla getting to know Ned in the early days of the war. Someone he could therefore have met when he wasn't surrounded by troops and other rebel commanders. Wylla's name certainly could point to Dorne and Wyl, but in this case I think it points to the White Harbor region and Wylla Manderly. A Fisherman's Daughter who is named after the Local lord's family like we have seen done in many places, and somehow ends up in Dorne as a wet nurse waiting on the birth of Lyanna's child. A woman of the small folk who plays a pivotal role in hiding who Jon really is, and whose beginnings becomes of intense interest to those who doubt Ned Stark's story.

Your's is simpler, and therefore maybe better, but I'm kinda tied to my guess.

@SFDanny

I agree that Wylla has a role to play, possibly a very significant one as far as knowledge of the birth of Jon situation goes. There is a tendency to pin our hopes on Howland Reed to fill us in, or on Bran-in-a-tree witnessing what happened, and it's easy to overlook Wylla, who is apparently still living, or was still alive very recently. Robert certainly understands her to be a commoner, whether that is true or a cover.

Pretty much the only things that lead me to wonder if she was Dornish is the similarity between her name and the Dornish house of Wyl, whose castle happens to be located on the Wyl river, which on both the book and TWOIAF maps appears to come very close to the tower of joy. Similarly, the similarity between the name Wylla and the name Wyl causes me to wonder if there is a relation there.

Admittedly, Wyl and Wylla do not appear to be exclusive to Dorne:

(Dorne) Wylla in Starfall 
(North) Wylla the daughter of Wylis Manderly and Leona Woolfield
(North) Wylla of Fenn, mother of Lord Brandon's bastard Lonnel (half brother of Lord Rodwell and Lord Beron)
(Dorne) Wylla of Wyl, the warrior maid from the time of Durran the Good

(North) Wyl in Winterfell
(Riverlands?) Wyl the Whittler
(Vale) Wyl Waynwood
(Dorne) Wyl of Wyl

As for a connection between Wylla and House Manderly, so far we only have a Wylla Manderly who would have to be much younger than the Wylla alleged to have given birth to Jon. But there is a Wylla from the North, from the Neck, who lived about a century before Jon, and mothered a bastard with the eventual Lord Brandon Stark, son of Lord Cregan.

[JRRStark]

3 hours ago, SFDanny said:

I believe Martin is going to tie up the false leads about who is Jon's mom. That means letting us know about Ashara and Wylla in whatever role they play in Jon's origin story. I doubt they will play no role, although I'm convinced Lyanna is his mother. But concerning Wylla, I think she will tell us the beginnings of two false trails. I think she is almost certainly a wet nurse at the Tower of Joy, but I also think she is the Fisherman's Daughter that Davos finds out about from Lord Godric. My guess is that the Fisherman's Daughter's tale is a cover story for those who check back on Wylla's birth and childhood. It also gives a plausible way of Wylla getting to know Ned in the early days of the war. Someone he could therefore have met when he wasn't surrounded by troops and other rebel commanders. Wylla's name certainly could point to Dorne and Wyl, but in this case I think it points to the White Harbor region and Wylla Manderly. A Fisherman's Daughter who is named after the Local lord's family like we have seen done in many places, and somehow ends up in Dorne as a wet nurse waiting on the birth of Lyanna's child. A woman of the small folk who plays a pivotal role in hiding who Jon really is, and whose beginnings becomes of intense interest to those who doubt Ned Stark's story.

Your's is simpler, and therefore maybe better, but I'm kinda tied to my guess.

That makes sense. Whoever she is Ned must have been confident that she would not tell the truth of who Jon is. She is happy to accept being Ned's bit on the side as If I'm right it is well known she is Jon's mother. She is a wet nurse so of low birth but allowed into high households as who else has a wet nurse. She is kept close to the Daynes. This is a massive secret to keep and must have a certain shame attached being Ned's discarded lover, so wouldn't help with finding a husband. Dorne has a different set of morals to further north so perhaps this isn't a thing in Dorne anyway. Nevertheless she isn't hidden, open to anyone e.g Vary's getting info on her and Ned. So Ned has to have complete trust in her and the Daynes can offer her protection but why. Or the Daynes know something about R+L=J and due to pressure from Ashara and their through AD faith in Rheagar will keep his secrets. However If the Daynes know he is the third head of the dragon etc they also know Ned isn't doing anything to reveal it and is never going to so he can't become the PTWP. So then logic of her staying in Starfell is she was just a Dayne wetnurse hence just goes back to their household, so why does Ned trust her to keep the secret? loyalty to Lyanna? Lyanna must be the key, He would follow her lead on this.

Of course the easiest solution is that its just true. Jon is his bastard. Didn't Ned tell Jon he would tell him about his mother when he got back from KL? in which case he by default must also tell him about his father if its not him. 

[corbon]

13 hours ago, SFDanny said:

The simple reality is, I think, that the Daynes have taken into their home a woman who says she is the mother of Jon Snow

Just a reminder that there is no evidence that Wylla says she is Jon's mother. Or in fact says anything at all on the topic of Jon.

12 hours ago, Ygrain said:

Also, the trip to Starfall may have been part of Ned's plan to muddy the waters around Jon's origin. 

I agree. There are many factors at play here, or potentially at play at least.

29 minutes ago, JRRStark said:

That makes sense. Whoever she is Ned must have been confident that she would not tell the truth of who Jon is.

Are you sure she knows the truth of Jon? She could easily be a local wetnurse hired by Ned after the ToJ.
Frankly, I suspect she does, that she was at the ToJ before Ned arrived - you don't wait until after the birth to start looking for a wetnurse (the baby is going to be hungry within hours, if not immediately) and its likely the ToJ crew would have one prepared if the birth was imminent.

29 minutes ago, JRRStark said:

She is happy to accept being Ned's bit on the side as If I'm right it is well known she is Jon's mother.

Is she?
Or is that just the rumour spoken behind her back in Starfall? The assumption they made when Ned arrived with her and Jon in tow?
I think too many people assume a lot that we don;t know and isn't actually indicated in the text. Its possible, yes, but there is nothing that actually indicates Wylla's position or statements on anything.

29 minutes ago, JRRStark said:

She is a wet nurse so of low birth but allowed into high households as who else has a wet nurse. She is kept close to the Daynes.

Its highly possible Ned just used her, a local girl from near the ToJ area, as Jon's wetnurse. In return, he made sure she had lifelong employment and a place. Its unlikely Winterfell was a good place for her (she's a foreigner used to a warmer climate plus hostility from Cat and the rest of the household following her lead no doubt), so Ned arranged a place for her at Starfall - the Daynes owe him plenty. Its even possible, as some suggest, that she stayed in Starfall and never went to Winterfell, though I can see nothing to indicate that and see no logic in the arguments they make.

29 minutes ago, JRRStark said:

This is a massive secret to keep and must have a certain shame attached being Ned's discarded lover, so wouldn't help with finding a husband.

I'm not so sure about that, even assuming she was Ned's discarded lover, which I think very unlikely. 
She's basically got a relatively cushy castle life forever - thats a much bigger plus than some history with a nobleman from 3000 miles away who she'll never see again is a minus.

29 minutes ago, JRRStark said:

Nevertheless she isn't hidden, open to anyone e.g Vary's getting info on her and Ned. So Ned has to have complete trust in her and the Daynes can offer her protection but why.

Or she doesn't actually have anything to hide.

29 minutes ago, JRRStark said:

Or the Daynes know something about R+L=J and due to pressure from Ashara and their through AD faith in Rheagar will keep his secrets.

This is possible too, especially if she was already at ToJ when Ned came.

29 minutes ago, JRRStark said:

However If the Daynes know he is the third head of the dragon etc they also know Ned isn't doing anything to reveal it and is never going to so he can't become the PTWP.

No reason the Daynes would know the depths behind Rhaegar's planning. 

29 minutes ago, JRRStark said:

So then logic of her staying in Starfell is she was just a Dayne wetnurse hence just goes back to their household, so why does Ned trust her to keep the secret? loyalty to Lyanna? Lyanna must be the key, He would follow her lead on this.

And why would some random dornish peasant have any loyalty to Lyanna.

Most likely Wylla has no huge secret.
Or if she does, its the secret of Rhaegar and Lyanna at the ToJ, not her personal secret. And Loyalty to Rhaegar, or the Daynes, who are loyal to Rhaegar, is much more reasonable than loyalty to Lyanna.

29 minutes ago, JRRStark said:

Of course the easiest solution is that its just true. Jon is his bastard. Didn't Ned tell Jon he would tell him about his mother when he got back from KL? in which case he by default must also tell him about his father if its not him. 

No, thats not a logical necessity.

[Lady of Mercia]

1 hour ago, JRRStark said:

Of course the easiest solution is that its just true. Jon is his bastard. Didn't Ned tell Jon he would tell him about his mother when he got back from KL? in which case he by default must also tell him about his father if its not him. 

I believe that was show-only. That conversation didn't happen in the books IIRC.

[SFDanny]

7 hours ago, corbon said:

Just a reminder that there is no evidence that Wylla says she is Jon's mother. Or in fact says anything at all on the topic of Jon.

Of course not all evidence is equal, but we have evidence. It's hearsay evidence, and not known to be first hand to young Ned, but it is evidence. Lord Edric names her to be Jon's mother, and claims to have known her for years. Either he has it straight from Wylla herself (very likely) or someone in Starfall in position to guide the young lord has told him this tale (as a single source unlikely, but as a corroborating source very likely) and it isn't being controverted by any other source we know about. Name that weak if you will, but I would call it evidence. The question becomes is Ned Dayne lying? Or is he telling Arya the truth as he knows it? I read Edric as very credible, with no motive to lie.

However, when we read Ned Stark's words to Robert naming Wylla as Jon's mom, I think that removes any doubt that if one shows up to the gates of Starfall and asks to talk to the mother of Ned Stark's bastard Jon Snow, if you are by chance allowed in, it would be Wylla that comes to greet you. As far as I know that is the sum total of evidence of any kind pointing to Wylla claiming to be Jon's mother.

So, from Lord Eddard's own lips, It is very likely that on two occasions Ned Stark has given Robert Wylla's name as the name of Jon's mother. If Robert wants to check on his best friend's story, then it had better not turn out that some other woman's name is being said to be Jon's mom. That would call into question Ned's entire story of Lyanna, the Kingsguard, and who are Jon's parents.

[JRRStark]

On 3/18/2019 at 9:13 PM, Lady of Mercia said:

I believe that was show-only. That conversation didn't happen in the books IIRC.

Ahh! thanks wasn't sure about that.

 

[JRRStark]

17 hours ago, SFDanny said:

Of course not all evidence is equal, but we have evidence. It's hearsay evidence, and not known to be first hand to young Ned, but it is evidence. Lord Edric names her to be Jon's mother, and claims to have known her for years. Either he has it straight from Wylla herself (very likely) or someone in Starfall in position to guide the young lord has told him this tale (as a single source unlikely, but as a corroborating source very likely) and it isn't being controverted by any other source we know about. Name that weak if you will, but I would call it evidence. The question becomes is Ned Dayne lying? Or is he telling Arya the truth as he knows it? I read Edric as very credible, with no motive to lie.

However, when we read Ned Stark's words to Robert naming Wylla as Jon's mom, I think that removes any doubt that if one shows up to the gates of Starfall and asks to talk to the mother of Ned Stark's bastard Jon Snow, if you are by chance allowed in, it would be Wylla that comes to greet you. As far as I know that is the sum total of evidence of any kind pointing to Wylla claiming to be Jon's mother.

So, from Lord Eddard's own lips, It is very likely that on two occasions Ned Stark has given Robert Wylla's name as the name of Jon's mother. If Robert wants to check on his best friend's story, then it had better not turn out that some other woman's name is being said to be Jon's mom. That would call into question Ned's entire story of Lyanna, the Kingsguard, and who are Jon's parents.

Yes this seems to clearly point to Wylla being Jon's mother. And the text points to this not being a secret as young Edric seems surprised Ayra doesn't know. So Wylla has to have a reason to play along with this and Ned has to have strong belief that she will.

A thought occurs that this is part of a deeper conspiracy. Faegon is actually the real son of Rheagar and Jon is just the decoy. Ashara isn't dead but needed a cover story to run off with him and bring him up to his destiny. ie she is the woman with Jon Con. Hence Jon doesn't need to know anything so can just end up at the wall.

More to the point of all this did Lyanna have a plan in mind for Jon other than hiding his true parentage. Rheagar certainly did, beliving he need to produce the third head of the dragon.  How much was Lyanna in on it, I'm guessing she is fully in the know as she doesn't seem to be a women to be trifled with or just have her head turned by the handsome prince.

The assumption of Ned hiding Jon and claiming to be his Father is this is what he promised Lyanna. Of course this might be just what Ned did as part of his way of keeping Lyannas promise, what the promise is who knows, but it must have significance to the song of ice and fire I think, as opposed to the game of thrones.

[corbon]

17 hours ago, SFDanny said:

Of course not all evidence is equal, but we have evidence. It's hearsay evidence, and not known to be first hand to young Ned, but it is evidence.

I disagree. I think you are (unusually) blinding yourself with your conviction.

The evidence does not in any way say or suggest that the source is Wylla. It only states that Wylla is the mother.

Quote

Lord Edric names her to be Jon's mother, and claims to have known her for years. Either he has it straight from Wylla herself (very likely) or

No reason that that is likely. Its certainly not necessary and its certainly in now way indicated by Edric.

Quote

someone in Starfall in position to guide the young lord has told him this tale (as a single source unlikely, but as a corroborating source very likely) 

No reason that this is unlikely. It also need not be a single source. "Known" information is often from many seemingly independent sources. 

Quote

and it isn't being controverted by any other source we know about. Name that weak if you will, but I would call it evidence.

Its evidence Wylla is the mother, yes. It is not evidence that Wylla is the source of this information. The source is not spoken to at all - or is Allyria in the case of Ashara stuff (which means she should be the default source for the Wylla stuff too).

Quote

The question becomes is Ned Dayne lying? Or is he telling Arya the truth as he knows it? I read Edric as very credible, with no motive to lie.

I agree completely.

Quote

However, when we read Ned Stark's words to Robert naming Wylla as Jon's mom, I think that removes any doubt that if one shows up to the gates of Starfall and asks to talk to the mother of Ned Stark's bastard Jon Snow, if you are by chance allowed in, it would be Wylla that comes to greet you. As far as I know that is the sum total of evidence of any kind pointing to Wylla claiming to be Jon's mother.

It does no such thing. The only things Ned's conversation with Robert reveals is that some time in the past Ned revealed the name Wylla to Robert when Robert asked him who a certain woman was, and that Robert believes that woman to be Jon Snow's mother. All else is entirely supposition.

It may be that if one shows up to the gates of Starfall and asks to talk to the mother of Ned Stark's bastard Jon Snow, Wylla may come to the gate. But that is not in any way indicated by Robert's conversation with Ned.

Quote

So, from Lord Eddard's own lips, It is very likely that on two occasions Ned Stark has given Robert Wylla's name as the name of Jon's mother. If Robert wants to check on his best friend's story, then it had better not turn out that some other woman's name is being said to be Jon's mom. That would call into question Ned's entire story of Lyanna, the Kingsguard, and who are Jon's parents.

No one suggests that any other name is being said. And you will note, that Ned did not claim the second time that Wylla was Jon's mum. He merely answered Robert's question, which was "what was her name, that common girl of yours?" Robert then made a statement that she was Jon Snow's mum, but Ned did not respond to the statement, only answered the question. "Her name was Wylla".
So its not 'very likely' that time, its literally untrue that time. Ned gave the name as 'the woman Robert was thinking of', not as 'Jon's mother'. And if its not even true the second time, its not at all 'very likely' the first time.

Some points.
1. Ned never volunteers any information about Jon's origins to anyone that we see. The most is his answer to Robert, giving Wylla's name, which is reluctant, abrupt, and answers the question Robert answered precisely.
True or not?
2. Ned, aggressively and successfully shuts down any conversations about Jon's origins, any origins, both with Catelyn and with Robert (which is every time we here anybody really try it on with him - Cersei's scatttergun accusations are more or less ignored immediately).
True or not?
3. There are origin stories (rumours or theories if you will) for Jon at Winterfell, The Sisters, King Bob, Starfall, Winterfell and less clear, Casterly Rock (Cersei). All have different variations (if you accept that Robert's theory is different from Starfalls as he clearly sees Wylla as the special woman that made Ned put aside his honour for a moment whereas Starfall's sees Ashara as the special woman and Wylla... somehow on the side.)
True or not?

Some related questions.
i) If Ned is willing to tell King Bob a story once, why does she shut down the conversation with Bob so aggressively when we see it? Why is he so clearly opposed to telling the same story again?
ii) If Ned is willing to tell a story to King Bob, why is he not willing to tell the same story to Catelyn? Or to anyone else interested?
iii) If Ned actually has a story, or wants varied stories out there to confuse the issue, why does he shut down any such conversation, and in fact root out and stop any whispering on the subject? Why not encourage one or more, or all, of the rumours? Even, especially, while giving the appearance of trying to shut them down. But no, he's actually very efficient at shutting them down.
iv) If Ned and Wylla are both telling the same story, Ned's planned story, why are the stories from Robert and Starfall different? Why does Robert think Wylla is the one who was special to Ned and not bring up Ashara?

As far as I've seen so far, your beliefs seem to be unable to provide reasonable answers to any of these questions.

On the other hand, mine does.
My belief is that, consistent with what we see, Ned never tells anyone anything voluntarily about Jon's origins and always shuts down those conversations as fast as possible. That covers i, ii and iii and matches exactly to 1, 2 while explaining 3 - there is no story from Ned so people everywhere make their own judgements based on the information available to them.
So why are the stories different?
I think Ned arrived at Starfall with Wylla and Jon in tow - having come from the ToJ, he would have needed a wetnurse immediately, either already at ToJ or as immediately as possible.
So the Starfall people, and anyone who has direct reports of Ned's appearance there (King Bob), know that Ashara was not the mum, and lacking anyone else, assume Wylla is the mum. Everyone else hears about Ashara suiciding when Ned leaves Starfall with a bastard, and assume Ashara is the mum, except the Sisters area, who probably didn't even hear about Ashara and basically make up a local origin story as Ned passed through their area in roughly (very roughly, we know not actually right, but they don't) the right time frame.

I posit that when Ned and Robert reconciled, Robert had had reports (from Varys?) about Ned's arrival at Starfall with a peasant woman and a bastard. He pressed Ned for information and in much the same way that we saw in the later conversation, Ned gave him Wylla's name without actually stating she was Jon's mother, while avoiding telling Robert anything of substance. In a similar way, he told Robert the absolute minimum necessary about Lyanna - likely that she died of a fever, in his arms. Or something similar.
This fits precisely with the patterns we see later, exactly matches all the textual details we have, and answers all of the awkward questions cleanly.
Your beliefs change the patterns we see from Ned, include/assume information we are not actually given in the text, and fail the awkward questions.
 

31 minutes ago, JRRStark said:

Yes this seems to clearly point to Wylla being Jon's mother. And the text points to this not being a secret as young Edric seems surprised Ayra doesn't know. So Wylla has to have a reason to play along with this and Ned has to have strong belief that she will.

Well, its not a 'secret'. But its also just a 'known' belief, unquestioned, unthought about even. That doesn't indicate that Wylla has ever been directly asked by young Ned. 

Quote

A thought occurs that this is part of a deeper conspiracy. Faegon is actually the real son of Rheagar and Jon is just the decoy. Ashara isn't dead but needed a cover story to run off with him and bring him up to his destiny. ie she is the woman with Jon Con. Hence Jon doesn't need to know anything so can just end up at the wall.

Well, I'm of the current opinion that Ashara did indeed take Aegon (who she believes to be real, but may have been mislead) to Essos. I don't think its part of a grand plan including Jon though, I think its two independent things that touched briefly in timing. Ashara was Elia's handmaid and friend, and Aegon would be the actual heir, so she'd be all about him. Jon would be the spare, maybe a bastard in her eyes, maybe of no interest to her as he was not Elia's, and possibly the result of a kind of betrayal of Elia by Rhaegar. And yes, her suicide is the cover story, or her.

I think its a fortunate coincidence for both of them (Ned and Ashara) that the timing kind of worked to mix the two situations together and make both seem more reasonable.

Quote

More to the point of all this did Lyanna have a plan in mind for Jon other than hiding his true parentage. Rheagar certainly did, beliving he need to produce the third head of the dragon.  How much was Lyanna in on it, I'm guessing she is fully in the know as she doesn't seem to be a women to be trifled with or just have her head turned by the handsome prince.

We can't really tell. I suspect that it was pretty much a case of 'all is lost, save his life' by the time Ned is by her deathbed, rather than 'this is the plan for his future'.

Quote

The assumption of Ned hiding Jon and claiming to be his Father is this is what he promised Lyanna. Of course this might be just what Ned did as part of his way of keeping Lyannas promise, what the promise is who knows, but it must have significance to the song of ice and fire I think, as opposed to the game of thrones.

Did Ned actually claim to be his father? Or just bring him back to Winterfell and treat him as his son?
Catelyn's words could very easily by a general description of Ned's actions rather than a specific quote of his words, and everything else is assumption. We never actually see Ned say (or think) that Jon is his son.

[corbon]

9 minutes ago, corbon said:

It may be that if one shows up to the gates of Starfall and asks to talk to the mother of Ned Stark's bastard Jon Snow, Wylla may come to the gate. But that is not in any way indicated by Robert's conversation with Ned.

Just to add to this part. 
It could be that if one did exactly this, some (Allyria), many, or all would turn to Wylla. Who may then look at them in puzzlement and say "I was his wetnurse, not his mother'. Or just go to the gates. But both of those entirely possible within what we know, though only one of those fits with the awkward questions and is actually consistent with both our raw data and the observed behavioural patterns.

[SFDanny]

On 3/19/2019 at 3:23 PM, corbon said:

I disagree. I think you are (unusually) blinding yourself with your conviction.

My friend, I don't  believe I am blinding myself with anything here, but I respect you saying why you think I'm wrong. Shall we go over this again?

Quote

"You were never the boy you were." Robert grumbled. "More's the pity. And yet there was that one time ... what was her name, that common girl of yours? Becca?  No, she was one of mine, gods love her, black hair and these sweet big eyes, you could drown in them. Yours was ... Aleena? No. You told me once. Was it Merryl? You know the one I mean, your bastard's mother?

"Her name was Wylla," Ned replied with cool courtesy, "and I would sooner not speak of her."

"Wylla. Yes." The King grinned. "She must have been a rare wench if she could make Lord Eddard Stark forget his honor, even for an hour. You never told me what she looked like ... "

Ned's mouth tightened in anger. "Nor will I. Leave it be, Robert, for the love you say you bear me. I dishonored  myself and I dishonored Catelyn, in the sight of gods and men."

"Gods have mercy, you scarcely knew Catelyn."

"I had taken her to wife. She was carrying my child." (AGoT 122-123) bold emphasis added

My remembrance is that you and I disagree on the first part here. Up to Ned giving Robert Wylla's name. Please correct me if I'm wrong about this.

Robert begins questions by making it clear he is asking about Ned's relationship with a common girl that was different than any other. He sets the parameters of the question as such, but he doesn't stop there. "And yet there was that one time ... what was her name, that common girl of yours?

Then Robert makes it very clear what type of relationship Ned had with "that common girl of yours" by giving out names and saying, no with each name he gives, that those were names of Robert's common girls in which it is clearly implied he had relationships of a sexual nature. Speaking of a girl of "mine" with "sweet big eyes, you could drown in" is hardly a reference to a causal acquaintance. But Robert doesn't stop there.

Robert also makes it clear he is searching for the name of a common girl Ned once had such a sexual relationship with, and that he told him about her once before. A very important piece of information. Robert says, "Yours was ... Aleena? No. You told me once? And then he goes on to narrow his inquiry down so there can be no mistaking whose name he his looking for when he says:

Quote

You know the one I mean, your bastard's mother? (AGoT 122)bold emphasis added

To which Ned finally replies, "Her name was Wylla." (AGoT 122) bold emphasis added

Here lies our first disagreement, I think. I believe Ned finally answers all of the questions Robert has asked, ending with one in which it is clear there is only one right answer, with the simple statement "Her name was Wylla." I also think that simple answer is a direct lie to his friend and his king.

My understanding of your position here is that Ned doesn't lie.Not that he never lies, but in this exchange between he and Robert he merely responds to the series of questions with a name that could be a correct answer to one of the preliminary narrowing questions, and does not answer Robert's real question that is distilled into the "You know the one, I mean, your bastard's mother?" Am I correct is stating your position?

Which then is the preliminary question that Ned has chosen to answer? That Ned knew a common woman once? Ned has undoubtably known hundreds, if not thousands of common women over the course of his life. If Ned is answering that question only with one name, then he is lying to Robert. If he answered with the all the names of the common women he has known, then that would be a truthful answer, but truncating an answer to make it seem he is answering truthfully to another question is just another way of lying.

This isn't a game Robert and Ned are playing. As Robert so directly tells Arya, "It is a great crime to lie to a king" (AGoT 168.) Ned understands what Robert is asking, but he is forced to give up the name of Wylla. Why then did he choose that name of all the common women Ned has known? Is it because he knows that the answers Wylla will give if she is asked the same questions will be the same as Ned's answers? I think it is.

But perhaps there is a shorter list that Ned could give the name of Wylla as an answer that would not be a lie? Perhaps a common woman that Ned knows that he loved, or lusted for, or even had sex with but who is not Jon's mother? Here we have little evidence beyond this declaration that Ned ever had such a relationship with a woman called Wylla, but we do get some more evidence two books later from Arya's conversation with young Ned Dayne, the Lord of Starfall.

But first let's finish looking at Robert and Ned's conversation amongst the Barrows of the First Men. I've highlighted two sections that I think are important. First, when Robert tells us that Ned "never told me what she looked like" this tells us that Wylla and Robert have never met. Combined with "You told me once" tells us that, while Robert and Wylla have never met, he knows her name. This is critical to understanding this conversation. While Robert seems to not remember Wylla's name from the first time Ned tells him her name, it would be a severe mistake on Ned's part to take a chance and give the king a different name than the one he did the first time. Indeed, as I've raised before it could be a test on Robert's part to see if Ned is being consistent in his answers. We have hints that Ned's story has been checked out by other sources and it would be unwise for Ned's Wylla story to change from the first time he told Robert the tale.

The end of the conversation I've highlighted above, we know that Robert accepts Ned's story of the timing in which Ned is supposed to have met Wylla. After Ned and Catelyn were married following the Battle of the Bells, and after Ned leaves Catelyn pregnant with his child Robb. About this too it is critically important for Ned to be consistent in his answers. It lets Ned hide behind a facade of shame in refusing to go any further in the Wylla story.

You know the second disagreement, I'm sure. This centers on what I think is a non-issue and you seem to think is vitally important. Does Ned Dayne actually say that Wylla told him that she is Jon's mom? No, that is not part of the dialogue. What is part of the dialogue makes it clear that this is a fact what young lord Ned thinks is widely known and the strong likelihood is that he and Wylla have discussed it.

Quote

"My lady? Ned said at last. "You have a baseborn brother ... Jon Snow?"

"He's with the Night's Watch on the Wall." Maybe I should go to the Wall instead of Riverrun. Jon wouldn't care who I killed or whether I brushed my hair ... "Jon looks like me, even though he's bastard-born. He used to muss my hair and call me 'little sister.'" Arya missed Jon most of all. Just saying his name made her feel sad. "How do you know about Jon?

"He is my milk brother."

"Brother?" Arya did not understand. "But you're from Dorne. How could you and Jon be blood?"

"Milk brothers. Not blood. My lady mother had no milk when I was little, so Wylla had to nurse me."

Arya was lost. "Who's Wylla?"

"Jon Snow's mother. He never told you. She's served us for years and years. Since before I was born."

"Jon never knew his mother. Not even her name." Arya gave Ned a wary look. "You know her? Truly?" Is he making mock of me? "If you lie I'll punch your face."

Wylla was my wetnurse," he repeated solemnly. "I swear it on the honor of my House."

"You have a House?" That was stupid; he was a squire, of course had a House. "Who are you?"

"My lady?" Ned looked embarrassed. "I'm Edric Dayne, the ... the Lord of Starfall." (ASoS 494) bold emphasis added

By which we know that when young Lord Dayne was a child at the breast he was breastfed by a wet-nurse named Wylla, as was Jon Snow. Ned knows this how? Because it was common knowledge in his household which includes Wylla who has served there since before the young lord was born. But not only is common knowledge that Lord Dayne and Jon Snow are milk brothers, but also that Wylla is Jon's mother. That in this exchange it is not stated explicitly that Ned was told this fact by Wylla herself is unimportant. Ned knows this because it is a fact known to him as a member of House Dayne, and Wylla has served House Dayne since before he was born. As such it is likely he does learn this from Wylla herself or from another member of his House and Wylla never contradicts this fact throughout Ned's childhood. Either of which make it clear that this is an important part of Wylla's history known to House Dayne. There is no trickery here with what Ned tells Arya. There is simply a repeating of the fact we first learn from Ned Stark in his discussions with Robert among the Barrows of the First Men. It confirms that what Ned has told Robert will be the story the Daynes and Wylla tell if need be. That is the critical takeaway from this part of the conversation. That both what Ned Stark said to Robert, and what Wylla and the Daynes say about Jon's mother's identity match is the keystone for the reader. It also is likely a lie, or cover story if you'd rather, that both Ned Stark and House Dayne have agreed upon to tell anyone who asks. It doesn't matter that the story as told by Lord Edric doesn't include a direct quote from Wylla explicitly stating she claims to be Jon's mother. It matters that both Lord Stark and Lord Dayne say the same.

I think then I've explained my views on what I see as our disagreements, my friend. Please correct me where you think I'm wrong.

To some of your other points or questions

On 3/19/2019 at 3:23 PM, corbon said:

It does no such thing. The only things Ned's conversation with Robert reveals is that some time in the past Ned revealed the name Wylla to Robert when Robert asked him who a certain woman was, and that Robert believes that woman to be Jon Snow's mother. All else is entirely supposition.

It may be that if one shows up to the gates of Starfall and asks to talk to the mother of Ned Stark's bastard Jon Snow, Wylla may come to the gate. But that is not in any way indicated by Robert's conversation with Ned.

No one suggests that any other name is being said. And you will note, that Ned did not claim the second time that Wylla was Jon's mum. He merely answered Robert's question, which was "what was her name, that common girl of yours?" Robert then made a statement that she was Jon Snow's mum, but Ned did not respond to the statement, only answered the question. "Her name was Wylla".
So its not 'very likely' that time, its literally untrue that time. Ned gave the name as 'the woman Robert was thinking of', not as 'Jon's mother'. And if its not even true the second time, its not at all 'very likely' the first time.

Let me say again this is not just a casual conversation between old friends. Ned and Robert are old friends, nor were they when Ned answered this for the first time with Robert. This is also between king and subject. It is a very unwise thing to lie to your king. A very dangerous thing to do. Ned is not playing word games in order to get out of talking to his old friend Robert about a shameful topic. He is saying a name for which there are terrible possible consequences if Wylla does not back up what he says. There is no mistake about what Robert is asking. He says it point blank. Ned's answer better be the same as he said to Robert the first time, and the intelligence from Varys's spies, the Lannister's inquiries, or Stannis's report's of fishwife's sons better line up. This is why cover stories are invented and the affected parties all tell the same tale. Heads can be lost, as well has the wealth and prestige of Houses lasting thousands of years. So, no, you choose to go with a view of this that reduces it to word play, and that just doesn't work with the deadly background we have been given. This book isn't called the "Game of Thrones" for nothing.

But before going on, what possibly within the exchange between Robert and Ned convinces you that this is the only interpretation one can have of this dialogue? As I've shown, there are a number of questions asked by Robert of Ned, all of which narrow the answer down to answering his last one, so why choose this one odd interpretation of the question Ned chose to answer? It's not to save Ned's honor because all of the answers but the answer "Lyanna" to the final question would be lies to Robert's questions, I'm convinced. There is no Wylla as Ned's lover in reality.

Here let me just add that I think the semantic games you think Ned is playing with Robert is a serious misread of Ned's character. I look at Ned Stark and see a character that has been forced to choose, as Maester Aemon tells Jon, between love and honor. He chooses love. He also uses honor and shame to hide his choice, but he chooses love when he promises to his sister to take Jon on as his own son and lie to the rest of the world about it, especially his best friend the new king. Ned isn't worried about trying to find a way to give an answer to Robert's questions that could possibly pass some nonsense test of what is strictly true or not and thereby save his honor. He already made that choice long ago. His answer is a straight up lie, and one contrived with others in order to ensure that Robert never found out the truth. That Ned is lying to Robert should be of no surprise to anyone. He has already confessed in his private thoughts about the lies he has had to tell.

Quote

"Treachery was a coin the Targaryens knew well," Robert said. The anger was building in him again. "Lannister paid them back in kind. It was no less than they deserved. I shall not trouble my sleep over it."

"You were not there," Ned said, bitterness in his voice. Troubled sleep was no stranger to him. He had lived his lies for fourteen years, yet they still haunted him at night. "There was no honor in that conquest." (AGoT 127) bold emphasis added

That Ned lied to Robert is an established fact, even if we can't agree to the full extent of those lies or what the lies fully entailed. Ned is not playing games about what question he is answering. He is lying to cover up the lies he has already told.

On 3/19/2019 at 3:23 PM, corbon said:

Some points.
1. Ned never volunteers any information about Jon's origins to anyone that we see. The most is his answer to Robert, giving Wylla's name, which is reluctant, abrupt, and answers the question Robert answered precisely.
True or not?

His answer to Robert is certainly a vitally important exception to this rule. It is the great thing about being a Hight Lord. You really don't have to answer any questions you don't want to with the one important exception being when those questions come from your king or his Hand. We have no evidence of Ned's answers to Jon Arryn, but to Robert he both lies and tries to stop the questioning. For the most part he is successful in hiding his lies.

On 3/19/2019 at 3:23 PM, corbon said:

2. Ned, aggressively and successfully shuts down any conversations about Jon's origins, any origins, both with Catelyn and with Robert (which is every time we here anybody really try it on with him - Cersei's scatttergun accusations are more or less ignored immediately).
True or not?

Again, he is the High Lord of the North, he doesn't have to answer anyone's questions at this point other than Robert's. The best way to keep a secret is not talk about it, which is mostly what Ned does, with the notable exception of Robert.

On 3/19/2019 at 3:23 PM, corbon said:

3. There are origin stories (rumours or theories if you will) for Jon at Winterfell, The Sisters, King Bob, Starfall, Winterfell and less clear, Casterly Rock (Cersei). All have different variations (if you accept that Robert's theory is different from Starfalls as he clearly sees Wylla as the special woman that made Ned put aside his honour for a moment whereas Starfall's sees Ashara as the special woman and Wylla... somehow on the side.)
True or not?

True, but that only ones that matter in keeping the secret are the answers he has to give to Robert, and the answers he has to share with the Daynes.

On 3/19/2019 at 3:23 PM, corbon said:

Some related questions.
i) If Ned is willing to tell King Bob a story once, why does she shut down the conversation with Bob so aggressively when we see it? Why is he so clearly opposed to telling the same story again?

Once again, the best way to keep a secret is not to talk about it. With Robert that isn't an option. He has to answer the questions Robert asks him and his attempt to get Robert to stop asking more questions is successful when he pleads for Robert to stop. He uses his supposed shame as the excuse for his plea and it works. So much the better. We don't know the details Ned shared with Robert the first time he tells him Wylla's name, but the less time spent of the topic the better for hiding the lies.

On 3/19/2019 at 3:23 PM, corbon said:

ii) If Ned is willing to tell a story to King Bob, why is he not willing to tell the same story to Catelyn? Or to anyone else interested?

Read the last reply, and the following:

Quote

And when you have it, what then? Some secrets are safer kept hidden. Some secrets are too dangerous to share, even with those you love and trust. 

 

On 3/19/2019 at 3:23 PM, corbon said:

iii) If Ned actually has a story, or wants varied stories out there to confuse the issue, why does he shut down any such conversation, and in fact root out and stop any whispering on the subject? Why not encourage one or more, or all, of the rumours? Even, especially, while giving the appearance of trying to shut them down. But no, he's actually very efficient at shutting them down.

Ned wants confusion about the subject and isn't about to clear it up by giving out new information to anyone he doesn't have to. He uses both his shame and his honor to stop discussion, but he isn't fool enough to believe there won't be discussion behind his back.

On 3/19/2019 at 3:23 PM, corbon said:

iv) If Ned and Wylla are both telling the same story, Ned's planned story, why are the stories from Robert and Starfall different? Why does Robert think Wylla is the one who was special to Ned and not bring up Ashara?

Simply because the Starfall addition is an invention based on two things. First, Ned's supposed attraction to Ashara, and secondly to Ashara's disappearing after Ned leaves Starfall. Ned and Wylla's stories are the same. What people invent because of Ashara's supposed plunge into the sea is another. Just as it is in Winterfell among the returning soldiers and servants. I also think that Ned cannot play up what happened to Ashara for a number of reasons. Honoring Ashara's memory.  Not wanting to do anything to upset the Daynes. Undermining his own story of Wylla with Robert. Robert may have a different memory of which Stark was involved with Ashara at Winterfell. And Ned may not be in the know about everything to do with Ashara's "death."

On 3/19/2019 at 3:23 PM, corbon said:

As far as I've seen so far, your beliefs seem to be unable to provide reasonable answers to any of these questions.

We will have to agree to disagree on this I'm afraid. I see my explanations as entirely reasonable and consistent with what we know. I see your attempt to have Ned trying to play word games with Robert over Wylla's name as fairly unreasonable and inconsistent with what Ned tells us about himself.

On 3/19/2019 at 3:23 PM, corbon said:

I think Ned arrived at Starfall with Wylla and Jon in tow - having come from the ToJ, he would have needed a wetnurse immediately, either already at ToJ or as immediately as possible.
So the Starfall people, and anyone who has direct reports of Ned's appearance there (King Bob), know that Ashara was not the mum, and lacking anyone else, assume Wylla is the mum. Everyone else hears about Ashara suiciding when Ned leaves Starfall with a bastard, and assume Ashara is the mum, except the Sisters area, who probably didn't even hear about Ashara and basically make up a local origin story as Ned passed through their area in roughly (very roughly, we know not actually right, but they don't) the right time frame.

I posit that when Ned and Robert reconciled, Robert had had reports (from Varys?) about Ned's arrival at Starfall with a peasant woman and a bastard. He pressed Ned for information and in much the same way that we saw in the later conversation, Ned gave him Wylla's name without actually stating she was Jon's mother, while avoiding telling Robert anything of substance. In a similar way, he told Robert the absolute minimum necessary about Lyanna - likely that she died of a fever, in his arms. Or something similar.
This fits precisely with the patterns we see later, exactly matches all the textual details we have, and answers all of the awkward questions cleanly.
Your beliefs change the patterns we see from Ned, include/assume information we are not actually given in the text, and fail the awkward questions.

As you know, much of this we agree upon. We don't agree about Ned not answering Robert's question about Jon's mother's name with the name of Wylla, and we disagree about the importance of Ned Dayne not saying specifically to Arya that Wylla told him she was Jon's mother.