Jump to content

The Lyanna + Rhaegar = Jon thread (Part III)


SFDanny

Recommended Posts

Rhaegar isn't presented as a monster. Aerys is presented as the monster. Rhaegar is remembered by everyone as a noble person with one incongruous thing. Turning around and saying oh no, he didn't really kidnap her, that would be un-nice, takes away that one incongruous thing, and for what? Change for the sake of upending isn't good writing.

Did you ever see a great, great movie by the Japanese director Akira Kurosawa called Rashômon? It's all about perspective. A crime is committed and the same story is retold from the different points of view. It's what Martin is doing in his series. He is forcing us to look at the world through different eyes and see that a monster in one person's eyes can be a honorable man in another. You have to choose what perspective most matches your own, and acknowledge that truth often lies, if it can be found, in between the viewpoints of each character. Rhaegar isn't likely to be a monster from most character's perspective because he doesn't have the same mental illness his father does (or at least so we can tell.) That doesn't mean his "kidnapping" of Lyanna isn't a horrible act of betrayal in the view of the Starks and the Baratheons. It doesn't mean it doesn't challenge the Martells and their claim to the throne of Westeros through young Aegon. Lyanna can be quiet willing for all of the last two views to be "true." And lord knows what Aerys saw in his paranoid delusional mind - another version of the truth?

You know what is good writing, TSS, something that challenges your view of the world. Perhaps Martin writing from so many viewpoints does that even if Lyanna turns out to have loved Prince Rhaegar as many characters, and many readers, believe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is not the Lyanna and Rhaegar romance that I doubt, it is the marriage. I completely agree with the romance theme in the books. But look at all the couples you listed. How many married before the first time they slept together? Even Robb, one of the most honourable characters in the books, didn't. Not even Rhaegar's own son, Jon, married his girl before sex. Or at all, for that matter.

So a Lyanna and Rhaegar marriage would be inconsistent with GRRM's writing, where characters sleep with each other on the spare of the moment, and only marry if it is planned (Dany and Drogo, Ned and Cat) or if they are stupid honourable fools (Robb).

I think GRRM has left us plenty of instances and preceedents that sets us to the possibility of a R + L marriage and romance, and thus keep up with his consistency.

Polygamy:

Martin opened this with the tradition that Targaryens had and can have multiple wives (with Aegon I and his sisters and Maegor). We have Dany contemplating a polygamous marriage. And the foreboding words, "The dragon has three heads." Rhaegar is a Targaryen, and he knows about the prophecy. If Dany could contemplate about a polygamous marriage, why not Rhaegar, who knows about the prophecy of the PWwP?

Marriage to Lyanna:

It's hinted in the books that Lyanna was a woman who wouldn't take crap from anyone, and is strong and willful, with a clear, realistic view of the world. Her comments on Roberts shows as much, and even her attitude and reaction to the men who were bullying Howland Reed. Somehow, I could not contemplate her being content being a mistress. Be impetuous enough to have sex with Rhaegar while not married, yes, but stay on to be a mistress? I just don't think she'd agree to that.

As for Rhaegar, Ned has remarked that he couldn't imagine him in a brothel. While this is a small thing, I think it hints that Rhaegar was not one who would slake his sexual desires on someone so easily and discard her or someone who'd take a mistress.

Another reason I think an R+L marriage is consistent with GRRM's writing is his underlying theme that no matter how honorable or noble our intentions are, shit still happens, because other people's morals and intentions are different than ours, and more often than not, clashes with ours. Lyanna and Rhaegar marrying is consistent with this.

Consider, Ned was killed because he tried to do what was noble and honorable. Robb fell because he married a girl he'd slept with because of her honor. In both cases, their actions, honorable to them as it seemed, was met with hostility because many had other plans and intentions. In Ned's case, the Lannisters wanted to rule, and Littlefinger was being Littlefinger. With Robb, the Freys was pissed he broke his vows to their sister.

Is it a far out thing to contemplate that the same thing had happened to Rhaegar and Lyanna? Rhaegar had a noble intention when he took Lyanna, enough for him to marry her. But because his actions clashed with so many elses, particularly the Starks, the Baratheons, and the Martells, all hell broke loose. Not only that, he had a mad king of a father initiated horrible punishments to those who protested.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry, if I mischaracterized your point, but I assumed your old post was against the idea of a Rhaegar and Lyanna romance. Glad to see it isn't a blanket objection to romance, but rather one limited to Rhaegar and Lyanna's wedding.

I was trying to make two separate points:

1. R+L marriage=sickening. The Rhaegar and Lyanna fling is fine, but getting married secretly would be too much romance and I would find it sickening. They've only just met each other, Lyanna is betrothed to a powerful lord, Rhaegar already has a wife, and later a war to worry about, it would be in both their best interests to wait a while and have a public wedding, but still they were so in love that they just had to get married :sick:.

2. R+L marriage=inconsistent. GRRM writes real relationships, not fairy tale ones, therefore Rhaegar and Lyanna being secretly married is inconsistent with his writing. Also, there are no typical fantasy heroes in ASOIAF, which is one of the best things about it. It would be inconsistent with GRRM's writing if he were to do the typical "farmboy realizes he's the true king" story just like many other fantasy authors have done.

Let's not mix up our positions anymore than they have been. I've never taken a position on when Rhaegar and Lyanna have sex.

Yeah, I know. What I was hinting at was that all it would take is for them to have sex once to create Jon. And that is all we know for sure that occurred. The rest is just speculation on why the KG may have been at the TOJ.

I have stated I think Lyanna's comments about Robert's "nature" tend to show Lyanna isn't likely to settle for being a mistress or for having her child be a bastard. That doesn't mean she wouldn't have sex with Rhaegar before they are married. Only that she would want to be married to the Prince. I see no indication that Rhaegar would refuse this, or even not prefer to wed Lyanna over having her as his mistress.

One, Lyanna's behaviour at the tourney at harrenhal indicates that she was reckless and that she wasn't precious. Two, at least twice she is likened to Arya, who is reckless and is not precious. You agree that she may have slept with Rhaegar before wedding him. What's to stop her waiting a while before wedding him? I agree that she wouldn't be content to be mistress. But I think she would be content to wait a while before wedding Rhaegar, especially when that would be the best for both of them.

Once again, I think it would be stupid for Rhaegar to marry Lyanna in secret. It would be better for him to wait until after the war, after he'd deposed Aerys, then have a huge wedding followed by a 77 course feast, for all the realm to see.

On an aside, I don't think Lyanna loved Robert. Nobody would be happy with an unfaithful husband, but I think she would have tried if she loved him. Then Rhaegar comes along, who she does love, and she is willing to do anything for him. Even if they were married, that is a HUGE sacrifice on Lyanna's part. Life wouldn't have been dandy being Rhaegar's second wife. Especially if infidelity bothered her as much as you say.

First, where do you get that Wylla is Elia's handmaid? Ashara was her handmaid and she is most definitely not lowborn. Wylla is only known to be Jon's wet nurse while he was in Starfall, and her origins are very cloudy to say the least.

Yeah, I was just plain wrong there, sorry!

Next, Lyanna is in hiding with Rhaegar for months and months, so finding the time to be married is not a problem if they wish to do so. Why they should choose to go into hiding is rather self-evident. They have a crazy King who has no reason to want his son to marry Lyanna, they have a first wife's family that has every reason to want to stop the wedding and stop any future non-Dornish claimants to the throne from being born, and they have a rather pissed off Storm Lord along with Lyanna's family who want Lyanna to marry Robert. All of which makes for powerful reason for secrecy.

I agree. And all the more reason to wait until everything has cooled down, and have a public wedding, so everyone can see Lyanna is Rhaegar's wife. Marrying in secret would do neither of them any favours.

Finally, back to why the KG were at the TOJ (just for a change ;)). Consider for a minute all of the people of Westeros. You made a big point a while back about how we need to see things from the point of view of people in the books, not from our point of view. According to your reasoning, where it is obvious the KG were guarding their king, every person who heard the deaths of HT, Dayne, and Whent, must know they died defending their king. Most people who heard that would also know that king wasn't Viserys. So, there would be a lot of people out there with suspicions about this bastard that suddenly appeared from nowhere who is apparently fathered by a man too honourable to father a bastard, yet none of them has said anything about it. I just don't see that as a plausible possibility. The people of Westeros must have come up with other ways to explain the presence of the KG at the TOJ other than that they were defending their king. Therefore, by the standards of the people of Westeros who know more about the KG than we ever will, it must be reasonable to believe they were doing something other than defending their king.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Polygamy:

Martin opened this with the tradition that Targaryens had and can have multiple wives (with Aegon I and his sisters and Maegor). We have Dany contemplating a polygamous marriage. And the foreboding words, "The dragon has three heads." Rhaegar is a Targaryen, and he knows about the prophecy. If Dany could contemplate about a polygamous marriage, why not Rhaegar, who knows about the prophecy of the PWwP?

I agree. But he would have waited until he was king and married her safely and publicly.

Marriage to Lyanna:

It's hinted in the books that Lyanna was a woman who wouldn't take crap from anyone, and is strong and willful, with a clear, realistic view of the world. Her comments on Roberts shows as much, and even her attitude and reaction to the men who were bullying Howland Reed. Somehow, I could not contemplate her being content being a mistress. Be impetuous enough to have sex with Rhaegar while not married, yes, but stay on to be a mistress? I just don't think she'd agree to that.

Agreed, although I do disagree slightly with your (and SFDanny's) perception of Lyanna. None of her behaviour indicates that she was proud. Quite the opposite, in fact. And anyway, are you saying that she was too worried about Robert's infidelity to marry him, but not worried about Rhaegar sleeping with Elia?

As for Rhaegar, Ned has remarked that he couldn't imagine him in a brothel. While this is a small thing, I think it hints that Rhaegar was not one who would slake his sexual desires on someone so easily and discard her or someone who'd take a mistress.

In the instance to which you refer Ned thinks of bastards, the lusts of men, Jon Snow, then Rhaegar. If anything, that is evidence that Jon is a bastard born of Rhaegar's lust.

Another reason I think an R+L marriage is consistent with GRRM's writing is his underlying theme that no matter how honorable or noble our intentions are, shit still happens, because other people's morals and intentions are different than ours, and more often than not, clashes with ours. Lyanna and Rhaegar marrying is consistent with this.

Yes, it fits with that theme. But so does them having a fling and not marrying, or waiting a while before marrying. And it doesn't fit with the first two points I made in the above post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rhaegar isn't presented as a monster. Aerys is presented as the monster. Rhaegar is remembered by everyone as a noble person with one incongruous thing. Turning around and saying oh no, he didn't really kidnap her, that would be un-nice, takes away that one incongruous thing, and for what? Change for the sake of upending isn't good writing.

If you read ASOIAF again you will notice that Robert’s take of Rhaegar as the megalomanic rapist is virtually unanswered until ASOS.

Even now when I don’t think this is the case I’m at complete loss on how Rhaegar can get of the hook for the elopement/kidnapping of Lyanna which predictable resulted in the death tens of thousands of people, apparently without him lifting a finger.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sarella, I'm not going to quote back to you all of your post because these are getting far too long, but let me respond to some of your points. First, we have different tastes regarding what would be "sickening" or not, but I would suggest that Martin is playing with motifs as old as the Moses and Cyrus the Great, and most certainly he is playing with the Arthur legends. He isn't the first nor will he be the last to do so, but the question is not that others have used the motif but rather how it is done. Certainly, Martin has given it his own twists (Jon is hardly a "farm boy") and I don't expect him to simply retell the Arthur story (my bet is Jon never becomes king.) All authors steal, but truly great authors don't make it obvious.

With the question of whether it is wise for Rhaegar and Lyanna to marry secretly or to do so publicly, I think you leave out the most important factor in their decision - Jon's bastardy. When Lyanna becomes pregnant (assuming the R+L+J scenario) they must either be wed before Jon is born or he will be a bastard, at least until Rhaegar takes the throne and can declare him legitimate. Would Lyanna, or Rhaegar for that matter, take the chance that their child will be subject to all the problems of illegitimacy? I don't think so.

Whether Lyanna is happy with being a second wife or not depends a lot on what is the nature of Rhaegar and Elia's marriage. We just don't know enough to tell what Elia thought of any of this. The only thing we do know is the Elia and Rhaegar's marriage was arranged, while Lyanna and Rhaegar's relationship, whatever it's legitimacy or not, was something chosen by Rhaegar and, probably, Lyanna as well.

With your point about suspicions about Jon if it is known the Kingsguard died defending him, I think you have outlined the best reason for Ned to have traveled to Starfall. He needs some other explanation about the child he brings back to Winterfell and his relationship with Ashara provides the best cover. His use of Wylla is something he seizes upon as well to cloud the picture of Jon's birth. If he can convince the world that Jon's mother is someone other than Lyanna it is much easier to hide the truth of the events at the Tower of Joy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So it was more important that a child be legitimate (even though Rhaegar could just legitimize him later) than it was to have a public wedding to dispell any rumours about Lyanna and Rhaegar, and make it clear to the world that Rhaegar had decided to do something that hadn't been done in over a hundred years, and it was done legally. I just don't buy it. I think they would "risk" illegitimacy.

Whether Lyanna is happy with being a second wife or not depends a lot on what is the nature of Rhaegar and Elia's marriage. We just don't know enough to tell what Elia thought of any of this. The only thing we do know is the Elia and Rhaegar's marriage was arranged, while Lyanna and Rhaegar's relationship, whatever it's legitimacy or not, was something chosen by Rhaegar and, probably, Lyanna as well.

It seems we agree on this, then. We can't say Lyanna would have insisted Rhaegar marry her based on what she said about Robert. That leaves only what we know of Lyanna from Meera's story, and from her neice, Arya. Both of which indicate she probably wouldn't have cared either way.

With your point about suspicions about Jon if it is known the Kingsguard died defending him, I think you have outlined the best reason for Ned to have traveled to Starfall. He needs some other explanation about the child he brings back to Winterfell and his relationship with Ashara provides the best cover. His use of Wylla is something he seizes upon as well to cloud the picture of Jon's birth. If he can convince the world that Jon's mother is someone other than Lyanna it is much easier to hide the truth of the events at the Tower of Joy.

While I agree, it doesn't anwer my point. I'm sure nobody (bar Howland and Wylla) knows that the KG died defending Jon. But everyone knows the KG died not with Viserys.

I'll use Catelyn to clear up what I was trying to say. Cat hears that Ned slew Ser Arthur Dayne, a member of the KG. But Viserys still lives. Therefore, Arthur Dayne wasn't with Viserys. Since Arthur was a KG knight, and because he must have been guarding his king (nothing else could explain what he was doing), then someone other than Viserys must have been king. Ned has brought home a child, who looks like a Stark, and fits the timeline to be Rhaegar and Lyanna's child. Cat isn't dimwitted, and would have put all this together. But she didn't.

What I am saying is that if it is so clear that Arthur Dayne was guarding his king, why doesn't Cat think so? Or anyone else who knows of the death of the KG? Hell, Varys would work it out in half a second.

What I am saying is that if nothing can explain the presence of the KG except their king, then everyone should know Viserys isn't the Targ heir. But they don't. Therefore the presence of the KG must be able to be explained by the people of Westeros, in other ways. E.g. that they were just following orders.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll use Catelyn to clear up what I was trying to say. Cat hears that Ned slew Ser Arthur Dayne, a member of the KG. But Viserys still lives. Therefore, Arthur Dayne wasn't with Viserys. Since Arthur was a KG knight, and because he must have been guarding his king (nothing else could explain what he was doing), then someone other than Viserys must have been king. Ned has brought home a child, who looks like a Stark, and fits the timeline to be Rhaegar and Lyanna's child. Cat isn't dimwitted, and would have put all this together. But she didn't.

What I am saying is that if it is so clear that Arthur Dayne was guarding his king, why doesn't Cat think so? Or anyone else who knows of the death of the KG? Hell, Varys would work it out in half a second.

What I am saying is that if nothing can explain the presence of the KG except their king, then everyone should know Viserys isn't the Targ heir. But they don't. Therefore the presence of the KG must be able to be explained by the people of Westeros, in other ways. E.g. that they were just following orders.

I also think that the 3 KG were guarding their king. But it is Aegon they are guarding, IMO, not Jon.

They dont have to guard Lyanna from Ned. He wouldn't harm her. Nor her child! Everything we (and they) know about Ned is his honor. Ned doesn't kill children. Nor would he turn over Lyanna and Rhaegar's child to Robert. It isnt his nature. We see that when he tells Cersei to take her children (with Jaime as the father) and run so Robert wont be able to kill her children. Ned is telling Cersei this even though she is his enemy and has dishonored Ned's best friend, who is the King. So we see Ned's honor, which cost him his life.

So why are the King's Guard, who know Ned, fighting Ned to the death? It cant be to protect Lyanna or her child. That doesn't make sense. They ARE protecting the Targaryen heir - who at that time is someone else who they believe Ned might turn over to Robert. It could only be Aegon. (I would also say Rhaenys but GRRM has said in Q & A that Rhaenys is dead. But he has never stated that Aegon is dead.) A young baby could easily have been switched. Heck, Jon did it later with Mance's baby.

If it were only Lyanna there, not yet having given birth, then one would think that at least one of the KG would go to Vicerys and the Queen. Babies do die in childbirth, etc. To furthur protect the line, one should have gone to Viscerys. But they didnt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sarella, how exactly is Cat to deduce that Jon is the Targ heir?

I am making an assumtion in saying that people probably assume that the Targ look will transfer to the children, but are there any references to what the Targ/Stark mixing leads to? :idea: Will they be dark like the Starks or Silver with violet eyes like the Targs? This is sort of like the Bar/Lann mixing...................nobody thought that the kids were Jamies, they just ASSUMED that they were Roberts! :stunned: We all know that they weren't and that both Jon Arryn and Ned have lost their life discovering it!

Maybe Cat( and everyone else) assumed that a Stark looking child is a child of a Stark.................not a Targ?............................. the blood is strong!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Other-in-law
Rhaegar isn't presented as a monster. Aerys is presented as the monster.

He is at first. The very first things we hear about Rhaegar are Robert's rants about how vile he was:

"I vowed to kill Rhaegar for what he did to her."

"In my dreams I kill him every night. A thousand deaths will still be less than he deserves."

"And Rhaegar...how many times do you think he raped your sister? How many hundreds of times?"

Raping women to death sounds pretty monstrous to me.

Rhaegar is remembered by everyone as a noble person with one incongruous thing. Turning around and saying oh no, he didn't really kidnap her, that would be un-nice, takes away that one incongruous thing, and for what? Change for the sake of upending isn't good writing.

Whatever, dude.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Other-in-law
I was trying to make two separate points:

1. R+L marriage=sickening. The Rhaegar and Lyanna fling is fine, but getting married secretly would be too much romance and I would find it sickening. They've only just met each other, Lyanna is betrothed to a powerful lord, Rhaegar already has a wife, and later a war to worry about, it would be in both their best interests to wait a while and have a public wedding, but still they were so in love that they just had to get married :sick:.

While I can see that that may seem excessively sweet, don't you think it's more than balanced by the bitterness that accompanies it? The way his father has her father slowly roasted to death, and plunges the nation into civil war beacuse of them? Or the bitterness that follows? The way they both die, and his kids are brutally slaughtered, and his family is nearly exterminated, and the survivors are forced to flee into impoverished exile, and the two members of the families that defeated him who were originally intended to marry them, respectively, marry each other and enjoy years of hateful marriage, and she cuckolds him and bears a vile little shit of an heir, etc, etc etc? Yeah, it's just so cute the way they all lived happily ever after in that cloying love story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So it was more important that a child be legitimate (even though Rhaegar could just legitimize him later) than it was to have a public wedding to dispell any rumours about Lyanna and Rhaegar, and make it clear to the world that Rhaegar had decided to do something that hadn't been done in over a hundred years, and it was done legally. I just don't buy it. I think they would "risk" illegitimacy.

Yes. They can always announce the marriage, but once Jon is born he is a bastard with no rights. Only a royal decree can change it, and there is no certainty that Rhaegar will reach the throne and be able to do so. In fact, he doesn't. The only way Rhaegar can be certain that Jon would not be forever cheated out of recognition, honor, and his inheritance is by marrying Lyanna before he is born. Would Lyanna want this risk of dishonor and a life of scorn for her child? I think not. Especially when a later marriage in front of everyone does nothing to dispel the problems confronting them as they hide away.

It seems we agree on this, then. We can't say Lyanna would have insisted Rhaegar marry her based on what she said about Robert. That leaves only what we know of Lyanna from Meera's story, and from her neice, Arya. Both of which indicate she probably wouldn't have cared either way.

???

How did you get an agreement out of what I said to the above? Lyanna's views on Robert's dalliances are on point. Her strength of character when she fights for Howland is germane. As are Arya's and Ned's remembrances. Lyanna does not seem the type of person who would settle for being a mistress or for being cheated upon. She demonstrably stands up against people who do dishonorable things to others, and she stands up for herself.

Which says nothing about whether she and/or Elia thought polygamy to be dishonorable or unacceptable. It maybe both accepted the idea. It maybe Elia objected, but could do nothing about it. It also could be the Lyanna accepted the idea of being a second wife knowing that Rhaegar loved her and not Elia. We have too little information about this situation, but that does not mean we have too little about Lyanna's views about mistresses and bastard children.

While I agree, it doesn't anwer my point. I'm sure nobody (bar Howland and Wylla) knows that the KG died defending Jon. But everyone knows the KG died not with Viserys.

I'll use Catelyn to clear up what I was trying to say. Cat hears that Ned slew Ser Arthur Dayne, a member of the KG. But Viserys still lives. Therefore, Arthur Dayne wasn't with Viserys. Since Arthur was a KG knight, and because he must have been guarding his king (nothing else could explain what he was doing), then someone other than Viserys must have been king. Ned has brought home a child, who looks like a Stark, and fits the timeline to be Rhaegar and Lyanna's child. Cat isn't dimwitted, and would have put all this together. But she didn't.

What I am saying is that if it is so clear that Arthur Dayne was guarding his king, why doesn't Cat think so? Or anyone else who knows of the death of the KG? Hell, Varys would work it out in half a second.

What I am saying is that if nothing can explain the presence of the KG except their king, then everyone should know Viserys isn't the Targ heir. But they don't. Therefore the presence of the KG must be able to be explained by the people of Westeros, in other ways. E.g. that they were just following orders.

Again, I have not said nothing else can explain the presence of the Kingsguard at the Tower of Joy other than the presence of the heir to the Targaryen throne. In fact, I have explained what I think are possible other scenarios and explained why I don't think many of them are probable. This mischaracterization of my argument is a straw man and doesn't help the discussion.

Why doesn't Catelyn or others leap to the conclusion that Jon must be Lyanna and Rhaegar's son and the heir to the throne? Because Ned goes to elaborate lengths to hide the fact and give the world an alternative explanation of Jon's origins. People know of his romance with Ashara and readily accept the dark secret of their bastard child. The fact that Ned never names Ashara as Jon's mother only serves to make others more suspicious of their relationship. On top of this he names Wylla to Robert as Jon's mother. This is an explanation that Robert can readily understand. He has fathered children with commoners himself and understands Ned's "needs." Given the explanations that Ned allows for others, we would not expect many, if any, to come to the conclusion that Jon might be more than he seems.

Also, Sarella, there is a huge difference between what we as readers can get from reading many different points of view, and that of what individual characters could be expected to see from their limited perspective. If Varys or Littlefinger, for instance, are alerted that there may be more to Jon's story than Ned has let on, they may well look to uncover it. Otherwise, the world is quite willing to accept the juicy rumors of Lady Ashara and Ned's dishonor, or of Ned's dalliance with a commoner.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So why are the King's Guard, who know Ned, fighting Ned to the death? It cant be to protect Lyanna or her child. That doesn't make sense. They ARE protecting the Targaryen heir - who at that time is someone else who they believe Ned might turn over to Robert. It could only be Aegon.

:wideeyed: Wow that is a really interesting point.

I mean, seriously... do they really think NED is going to kill/steal Lyanna's child (or allow others to do so), even if it is Rhaegar's?!?

It wouldn't happen. He would protect his nephew/niece regardless of who the father is.

I think you might be right. Aegon is more likely to be the kid in there (if there is one at all).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also think that the 3 KG were guarding their king. But it is Aegon they are guarding, IMO, not Jon.

They dont have to guard Lyanna from Ned. He wouldn't harm her. Nor her child! Everything we (and they) know about Ned is his honor. Ned doesn't kill children. Nor would he turn over Lyanna and Rhaegar's child to Robert. It isnt his nature. We see that when he tells Cersei to take her children (with Jaime as the father) and run so Robert wont be able to kill her children. Ned is telling Cersei this even though she is his enemy and has dishonored Ned's best friend, who is the King. So we see Ned's honor, which cost him his life.

So why are the King's Guard, who know Ned, fighting Ned to the death? It cant be to protect Lyanna or her child. That doesn't make sense. They ARE protecting the Targaryen heir - who at that time is someone else who they believe Ned might turn over to Robert. It could only be Aegon. (I would also say Rhaenys but GRRM has said in Q & A that Rhaenys is dead. But he has never stated that Aegon is dead.) A young baby could easily have been switched. Heck, Jon did it later with Mance's baby.

If it were only Lyanna there, not yet having given birth, then one would think that at least one of the KG would go to Vicerys and the Queen. Babies do die in childbirth, etc. To furthur protect the line, one should have gone to Viscerys. But they didnt.

The problem with this argument is that Lyanna's child has much to fear from Ned and the three Kingsguard know it. Not from Ned himself perhaps, but from rebel forces and Robert in particular. The fate of Rhaegar and Elia's children is known to these men and they can't dismiss the possibility that a similar fate waits for any child with Targaryen blood. The best they could hope for the child in Robert's new kingdom is a lifetime of imprisonment. The Kingsguard cannot count on Ned to lie and keep the child's identity secret. To do so is to surrender the child to the mercies of the rebels, which is not something we would expect these men to do.

Now, that does not rule out Aegon's presence at the Tower of Joy. If the child is there it would explain the presence of the Kingsguard, just as any legitimate Targaryen child would. The problem with this is that we have next to nothing to indicate it is so. I've put forward what I like to call the "Aegon the Darkstar" theory based on the hints that Ser Gerold Dayne could have a Targaryen heritage, but even I think this is far fetched. One thing we can rule out is the possibility that Jon is Aegon. There is no mistaking a two year old child from an infant, and we know from Martin that Aegon favored his father's Targaryen looks. If you really think Aegon was at the Tower, then the question becomes where is he now, and who is Jon's mother. Both are questions you haven't answered.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem with this argument is that Lyanna's child has much to fear from Ned and the three Kingsguard know it. Not from Ned himself perhaps, but from rebel forces and Robert in particular. The fate of Rhaegar and Elia's children is known to these men and they can't dismiss the possibility that a similar fate waits for any child with Targaryen blood. The best they could hope for the child in Robert's new kingdom is a lifetime of imprisonment. The Kingsguard cannot count on Ned to lie and keep the child's identity secret. To do so is to surrender the child to the mercies of the rebels, which is not something we would expect these men to do.

Now, that does not rule out Aegon's presence at the Tower of Joy. If the child is there it would explain the presence of the Kingsguard, just as any legitimate Targaryen child would. The problem with this is that we have next to nothing to indicate it is so. I've put forward what I like to call the "Aegon the Darkstar" theory based on the hints that Ser Gerold Dayne could have a Targaryen heritage, but even I think this is far fetched. One thing we can rule out is the possibility that Jon is Aegon. There is no mistaking a two year old child from an infant, and we know from Martin that Aegon favored his father's Targaryen looks. If you really think Aegon was at the Tower, then the question becomes where is he now, and who is Jon's mother. Both are questions you haven't answered.

To answer your ending questions first.....I believe R+L=J.

You state the KG couldn't rely on Ned keeping the child's Targaryen lineage private, that has some merit to it. In hindsight we do see that Ned did keep Jon's lineage very private. Hence, 4 long threads on this subject discussing the various possibilities. I think they could have at least talked it out beforehand. Maybe have Lyanna also talk with Ned. Come up with a plan. These are all very intelligent people. How could 3 KG keep the baby when the rest of Westeros has bent the knee to Robert? Maybe sneak him to Dorne? But then why fight. Enlist Ned's help in this. He'll want to keep the baby safe as well. As we have seen, Ned did come up with a plan to keep Jon's parents/or mother's identity secret.

Also, all of the men with Ned were his bannerman or sworn knights to him. No Lannisters or Baratheons, etc so there is a better chance of keeping things quiet.

Re: Aegon - I can't say I know for sure, but if Aegon is alive, then a very likely person is Darkstar as you have said. I agree. Darkstar looks "more Targaryen" as GRRM has stated. Darkstar has a streak of dark hair with the rest of his hair silver. He is also "angry" and fierce as Arianne has stated, and tries to kill Marcella and start a war with the Lannisters. I'm not saying that he knows he (may) be Aegon. We dont have any info on this.

In the spoiler chapters there is another possibility, but I dont think it good to mention it here. We have very little information to go on with that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I strongly disagree about Darkstar. He has his family looks not Targaryens. It was mentioned that both Ashara and Arthur Dayne had silvery hair and violet eyes and their nephew Edric has the same. And besides if somebody swapped babies in order to same Aegon there was no point just to leave him to be raised as some landed knight not knowing about his heritage. How could he be later proclaimed? Moreover Dayne is a well known and a prominent family. So it would be very difficult for them to produce a more then year old child from nowhere. And the last if Darkstar is Aegon then who knows it?

The version based on spoiler chapters is much better since all questions above are answered there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

first regarding Rhaegar's character: in AGoT while in kings landng, Eddard Stark often muses over and questions whether Rhaegar would have been a better king than robert (im pretty sure this starts after he discovers Gendry and after the fight about killing Daenarys)

second: what is Maester Aemon's role in all this. while with sam on the way to old town Aemon gives clues that he was involved with rhaegar, as he thought that Rhaegar was the PtwP, then that Aegon was, and that when he learns that Dany has dragons he thinks its her.....im not sure if he mentions Aegon by name, i think he says something like "Rhaegar's son" and just assumes its Aegon, when it could be jon

third: the KG at the ToJ....as to the whole guarding the heir idea- Viserys was the legitimate heir as he was older than Jon... one explanation for them being there is that they saw and treated Rhaegar more as their king than Aerys (Dayne was his best friend, and through Jaime we learn that at least Hightower acknowledged Aerys' madness), while i know that they are the KG and not the gaurd of the crown prince, consider this, Tywin Lannister ran Aerys' realm isnt it possible that Rhaegar ran his household/ became an exceedingly important governmental and authoritative figure, especially after Tywins dismissal as Hand... Hightower tells Jaime that it was his duty to obey not judge. A piece of evidence to support that the KG was Rhaegar's more than his father's is that 3 of them were at the trident with him, while 3 were guarding lyanna. why? Jaime wasnt trusted, so why was he left to defend the king by himself....the presence of the KG at the trident could be explained as they were leading the battle or protecting the prince, but it still points to rhaegar being in charge because the king is only left with one protector, while the other 3 are at the ToJ....

....also, why were the KG so opposed to letting Ned get to Lyanna, they were acquainted with each other, at least through reputation, and lyanna definately wanted her brother, why did they have to die? accounts of the sack of KL show Ned as being completely honorable and the KG knew of the sack, perhaps jsut not all the details and maybe they thought he'd kill jon, an heir not the heir, which was Viserys... perhaps they hoped that Jon had more of Rhaegar in him than Aerys, who Viserys took after, but they could never know that for sure....

feel free to rip me apart

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I strongly disagree about Darkstar. He has his family looks not Targaryens. It was mentioned that both Ashara and Arthur Dayne had silvery hair and violet eyes and their nephew Edric has the same. And besides if somebody swapped babies in order to same Aegon there was no point just to leave him to be raised as some landed knight not knowing about his heritage. How could he be later proclaimed? Moreover Dayne is a well known and a prominent family. So it would be very difficult for them to produce a more then year old child from nowhere. And the last if Darkstar is Aegon then who knows it?

The version based on spoiler chapters is much better since all questions above are answered there.

As the one who push this crackpot theory, let me say that I agree "Aegon the Darkstar" is far fetched. I think a version of what I've called the "Anastasia" scenario is much more likely regarding Aegon, but this involves, as you point out, the spoiler chapters.

That doesn't mean that there are not arguments in favor of "Aegon the Darkstar." We have his physical description that matches both the Daynes and the Targaryens (which makes the Daynes the perfect people to hide Aegon with,) we have his questionable mental stability - another Targ trait, we have his hatred of the Lannisters/Baratheons/ and we have the foreshadowing of Arianne in her thoughts about how she and Ser Gerold would make babies a beautiful as "dragonlords."

The Daynes are Targ loyalists and Lady Ashara has been close to the royal family as a handmaid to Aerys' queen, Rhaella. So if you want to hatch a conspiracy to hide Aegon from his enemies (including dear old grandpa) these are the people to work with. If this very unlikely scenario is true, then I believe that Ser Gerold knows his heritage and he will be a character of vengeance and madness towards his House's enemies (the opposite of Jon who sees the real enemy in the Others and the need to subsume the struggles for the throne in order to defeat them.) More likely, Martin is using him as a red herring and what he has to do with the story is less grandiose.

If we want to venture into crackpot territory, and I love to do so at times, this makes sense as a baby switching scenario. Martin has shown us this idea with Mance's child and with Bran and Rickon, so it is not unthinkable he could be telling us that it might have happened before. Add to that Martin's refusal to say Aegon is dead and you have the makings of a great crackpot theory that both has little to support it and can't, as yet, be disproved.

Now, if we want to really fall off the cliff into crackpot territory, think of the baby who is switched as being Ned and Ashara's baby conceived at Harrenhal. Then you have an explanation for Ned's preoccupation with the Lannister's killing of children (well before the attack on Bran,) including his thoughts about "the boy ... the boy," and a very understandable cause for Ashara's suicide. Think about Ned bearing that news to her on his trip to Starfall.

All of which is still extremely unlikely, but fun to wonder about. Also all of which could be shot down if we could nail down Ser Gerold's age. Unfortunately, we can't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i wrote the above reply before reading the second page of the thread... it never occured to me that baby Aegon may not have been baby Aegon, but if he was at the ToJ, why is lyanna bloody, is she having jon with Aegon there, if so, why only Aegon and not his sister too? maybe she's too hard to replace with an imposter as she's older. Guarding Rhaegar's heir, Aegon, would be a reason for the KG to be there, also, if both Aegon and jon are there perhaps this can lead to insight on why the fight...there's a new throne to be had and an acceptable heir with stark blood that could be proclaimed over Aegon, kinda like the Blackfyre problems, they know Ned's reputation but why trust he'd protect Aegon when he could rule for jon until he's old enough and have a half stark/ half targaryen on the throne, instead of a baratheon who only got the throne because he had the most Targaryen blood....granted this goes against ned's character as he doesnt want to rule and never did, but the KG wouldnt know that so they protect Aegon while keeping a potential threat from challenging him, except they are overwhelmed by ned's men

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well there are surely some questions about Darkstar. Most important why he joined Aryanne’s plot? All other plotters were her close friends and confidants that joined her out of their friendship. But Darkstar wasn’t one of them and Aryane didn’t even know him well. And he really wanted war for otherwise he wouldn’t try to kill Myrcella when it was obvious that the plot is failed.

You are right that Dayne looks so much like Targaryens make them perfect to baby’s swap. Yet if Aegon was swapped with real Gerold Dayne then such a swapping should be planned well beforehand. Why? Aegon was pretty safe in KL before Aerys decided to open gates for Tywin. Varys swapping babies last minute after he failed to persuade Aerys not to open gates looks more likely. Swapping babies earlier means far greater risk of discovering and demands involving of additional people. And where are those people? If Darkstar is Aegon and knows who he is somebody had to tell him. Who? Possible candidates - Ashara and Arthur Dayne are both long dead. O.k. no one have seen lady Ashara dead but no one have seen her alive so if she is she is far from her castle. So if Darkstar is Aegon the plot for saving him looks to be pointless since there would be no way to prove his identity. Maybe Elia tried to place her son as far as possible from her mad father in low? But then her brothers should be aware of it and Doran is obviously not. And if there were some Dornishmen involved into such a swapping then why would they keep it secret from their princes? Particularly of he was raised in Dorne?

As for Ned and Ashara supposed child swap this is plainly impossible. Aegon was born shortly before the tournament so he was over year old by the time of the failing of KL. Any child conceived during the tourney would be just few month old and this is impossible to take three of four month old baby for a year and some old.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...