The Lyanna + Rhaegar = Jon thread (Part III)

[Guest Other-in-law]

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)

If it happens so often, I'm sure you won't have any trouble providing the exact quotes?

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...

Not if Lyanna and Rhaegar were married. The son of the oldest son comes before the younger son. There isn't even room for debate on that one, it's just how it works.

[SFDanny]

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.

To your question why a baby switch would take place, we are told by maester Luwin the reasons. Splitting up the children gives a greater chance of survival for one of them in time of war. Not only are the children in danger from Robert's rebels, but they are held hostage by King Aerys against a possible betrayal of his cause by the Dornishmen. If in the paranoid mind of Aerys he keeps his grandchildren in harm's way instead of sending them to Dragonstone, it is not a far stretch to see Rhaegar and Elia worrying about their safety early on and cooking up a plot to sneak Aegon out of King's Landing.

Regarding your last point, Aegon is around a year old when he is supposedly killed at King's Landing, which puts the time of his conception just before or after the tourney at Harrenhal, if I have my timeline right. I don't remember off the top of my head if Elia is pregnant at Harrenhal, but Aegon is not born at that time or he would be older when King's Landing is sacked. A child of Ned and Ashara would be in the same age category. This is pushing things quite a bit, but if you believe the child with which Aegon could be switched is important, then this is the only one I can come up with. Very unlikely, but possible as far as I can tell.

For "Aegon the Darkstar" to work, one has to believe more than Lady Ashara in the Dayne House is in on it. Someone raises him as one of their own, and whoever is the foster parent of Ser Gerold would be a likely source of information on this topic. Presumably, Lady Ashara got their consent to raise the child when she brought it back from the switch. We just don't know enough about House Dayne and its survivors from the time of Robert's rebellion.

See, I told you it was far fetched, didn't I?

[Patrick Mallister]

If it happens so often, I'm sure you won't have any trouble providing the exact quotes?

after the fight about killing dany "Always? Suddenly uncomfortable, he found himself recalling Rhaegar Targaryen" .... granted he doesnt come out and say Rhaegar would be better, but he doesnt need to IMO

while visisting Chataya's with littlefinger he thinks "That was his curse. robert would swear undying love and forget them before evenfall, but ned stark kept his vows. he thought of the promises he'd made Lyanna as she lay dying, and the price he'd paid to keep them." .... he is disliking robert more and more.... later on the next page "the Robert he knew wouldn't have let it happen, but the Robert he had known had never been so practiced at shutting his eyes to things he did not wish to see." then finally a little later...."For the first time in years, he found himself remembering Rhaegar Targaryen. He wondered if Rhaegar had frequented brothels; somehow he thought not.".......again not coming out and saying i wish we didnt kill rhaegar, but questioning whether he was so bad

those were the quotes i was thinking of, and granted i know they dont say damn we should have kept rhaegar, but they can certainly lead to the question "was Rhaegar such a bad guy and could he have been a better king."

as for the question about the heir, it would work if they were married or if aegon was at the TOJ....i dont think that they were married, the arguments in the previous posts have convinced me, but i agree Viserys would not have been the heir

[the silent speaker]

after the fight about killing dany "Always? Suddenly uncomfortable, he found himself recalling Rhaegar Targaryen" .... granted he doesnt come out and say Rhaegar would be better, but he doesnt need to IMO

That's taken way out of context. "Always?" is in reference to his thought ten seconds before about how Robert's rages always cool quickly, and then he remembers that Robert still hates Rhaegar fifteen years after killing him.

Besides, whether Rhaegar is a bad guy isn't at question. At question is whether Rhaegar did a bad thing.

[Sarella]

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.

I think it is pretty obvious that Rhaegar didn't plan for the possibility that he may die. If he married Lyanna in secret, then died (as he did), then he left her (and her child) with pretty much no chance of surviving. She'd have a hard time convincing anyone that she actually did marry Rhaegar, and that Jon is legitimate. And even if she did, who knows what Aerys would do?! So no, Rhaegar didn't secretly marry Lyanna to protect her or the child in the case of his death. A secret marriage would in no way ensure certainty that Jon would not be forever cheated out of recognition, honor, and his inheritance. I mean, just look what happened?!?!

How did you get an agreement out of what I said to the above? Lyanna's views on Robert's dalliances are on point.

You can't have it both ways! Either Lyanna is bothered by having to share Robert, and is bothered by having to share Rhaegar, or she isn't bothered by either. You can't say she would have insisted Rhaegar marry her because she wouldn't accept Robert sleeping with other woman, when in marrying Rhaegar she is putting herself in a situation where Rhaegar will most likely sleep with another woman.

If anything, her comments about Robert indicate that she wouldn't have consented to a polygamous marriage.

Her strength of character when she fights for Howland is germane. As are Arya's and Ned's remembrances.

Strength of character, yes. Also recklessness. And disregard for convention. She doesn't behave like a lady at all. Do you really think this indicates she would insist on being a proper lady with regard to Rhaegar? And observe the proper ceremonies? Based on her behaviour at harrenhal, and on Arya's behaviour, this would be vastly out of character.

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.

Of course it means that! Sure, maybe one of the above things you said is true, but you have no evidence whatsoever to support any of them. And there is evidence against all of them. Lyanna said herself that Robert would never be faithful. This means she has a problem with sharing her men. This means she wouldn't have been content to share Rhaegar.

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.

Apologies. Mischaracterization and straw man not intended. I'll reword my argument. If the presence of the KG at the TOJ is best explained by the presence of a Targ heir, why don't the people of Westeros come to that conclusion? E.g. Varys hears that three KG died at the TOJ, but Viserys was not at the TOJ. You argue that the best explanation is that someone other that Viserys is the targ heir and was at the TOJ. So does Varys just shrug, and say "oh well, I won't bother working that one out."? Of course not. He would wonder who this targ heir is. Then when Ned Stark, who is known to have killed one of the KG at the TOJ, suddenly shows up with a child, Varys would have suspicions about the child. But he didn't. Which means he must have concluded that one of the other scenarios (in your above link) best explained the presence of the KG at the TOJ. Varys would know better than us what is the most likely scenario.

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.

Now you're arguing with the straw man! I wasn't saying Ned's explanation of Jon was unconvincing. I am saying that if the best explanation of the KG at the TOJ is the targ heir, why doesn't Cat, Varys, or anyone think so? If they thought that was the best explanation, then they would have suspicions about the child Ned suddenly appeared with after being at the TOJ. You are yet to address this argument. All of your posts so far have danced around it. Perhaps I am not making my point clearly enough.

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.

There is no need for them to be alerted by someone. They ought already be alerted, by the presence of the KG at the TOJ, if indeed the best explanation of the KG at the TOJ is the Targ heir. Because they are not alerted, there must be a scenario that better explains the precence of the KG at the TOJ.

[Shewoman]

Lyanna vanished from the North and somehow the idea that Rhaegar took her spread (we don't know how this happened). We are unaware of anyone who knew her (aside from Rhaegar) seeing her until Ned found her dying at the Tower of Joy. Since we know of no other Lyanna-sightings since she "vanished," I think she and Rhaegar went to the Tower of Joy quickly.

Ned's "She was a Stark of Winterfell" does seem to indicate that he is unaware of a marriage between Lyanna and Rhaegar . . . or else that he denied its legitimacy.

Wylla was not Elia's handmaiden. We know that Ashara Dayne spent some time in KL as a lady-in-waiting to Elia; we don't know that Wylla was in King's Landing or at court. But I suspect that she was at the ToJ: it's likely that a wetnurse would have been provided for the child that Rhaegar clearly hoped would come, since Lyanna had not given birth before and it couldn't be counted on that she could nurse the child herself. If Wylla was that wetnurse, Ashara was probably somehow involved (in the series present, Wylla seems to work for the Daynes; either that was a long-standing relationship or the Daynes took her in in gratitude for some service).

[Mezeh]

To your question why a baby switch would take place, we are told by maester Luwin the reasons. Splitting up the children gives a greater chance of survival for one of them in time of war. Not only are the children in danger from Robert's rebels, but they are held hostage by King Aerys against a possible betrayal of his cause by the Dornishmen. If in the paranoid mind of Aerys he keeps his grandchildren in harm's way instead of sending them to Dragonstone, it is not a far stretch to see Rhaegar and Elia worrying about their safety early on and cooking up a plot to sneak Aegon out of King's Landing.

The point is that KL never was in danger from rebels before Rhaegar was defeated and killed on Trident. There was no reason to split Bran and Rickon while they were still protected by the walls of Winterfell. The same for children of Rhaegar. Besides travel is dangerous for little baby so taking him from the castle mean to put him in danger. And again early swapping could have been detected. Babies do not look the same and people who had a chance to have a close look would see a change. This mean that early swapping demanded involvement of all Elia servants that were close to the baby and this was a great risk. Swapping on the last moment however could have been made without of with a very few witness and the point was to win some time to save Aegon. Even few hours would be enough. Of course Gregor smashing child head by the wall made recognition impossible but swappers could not have count on it beforehand.

Regarding your last point, Aegon is around a year old when he is supposedly killed at King's Landing, which puts the time of his conception just before or after the tourney at Harrenhal, if I have my timeline right. I don't remember off the top of my head if Elia is pregnant at Harrenhal, but Aegon is not born at that time or he would be older when King's Landing is sacked. A child of Ned and Ashara would be in the same age category. This is pushing things quite a bit, but if you believe the child with which Aegon could be switched is important, then this is the only one I can come up with. Very unlikely, but possible as far as I can tell.

As far as I understand Aegon was born before the tourney. Rhaegar was with Elia by the time that Aegon was born and it seems that after tourney he appeared in the capital only shortly before the Trident.

For "Aegon the Darkstar" to work, one has to believe more than Lady Ashara in the Dayne House is in on it. Someone raises him as one of their own, and whoever is the foster parent of Ser Gerold would be a likely source of information on this topic. Presumably, Lady Ashara got their consent to raise the child when she brought it back from the switch. We just don't know enough about House Dayne and its survivors from the time of Robert's rebellion.

See, I told you it was far fetched, didn't I?

Whatever the source of information would be he (or she) must be somebody whose words will be believed. And once again if Aegon was hidden in Dorne then why to keep the information from Doran and Oberyn Martells? If Aegon was taken to Free Cities there was no need for them to know but if he was hidden on their territory by their Dayne family they should have trusted their princes.

Yet Oberyn was on the tourney and probably somehow involved into the story.

[Enguerrand]

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.

Well if she is pregnant I’m not so sure it would be the best. Lyanna would dishonour herself further and Rhaegar wouldn't look better either.

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.

I think it’s rather obvious that this isn’t an option. To make an official wedding he needs at the very least his fathers permission, he must explain, and sell, why eloping with one of the great lords betrothed daughter and engaging her in bigamy is such a good idea. Since he let the realm fall into civil war without giving any signs of action, it seems quite likely that he didn’t expect it to work.

I think the marriage wasn’t about establishing any legitimacy for the throne, (IMO Rhaegar never thought it would go so far.) but making the child a true head of the dragon.

Agreed, although I do disagree slightly with your (and SFDanny's) perception of Lyanna. None of her behaviour indicates that she was proud.

I think quite alot indicated she was proud, but perhaps you mean not bound by conventions?

Strength of character, yes. Also recklessness. And disregard for convention. She doesn't behave like a lady at all. Do you really think this indicates she would insist on being a proper lady with regard to Rhaegar? And observe the proper ceremonies?

Yes I would. Why should she want’s dishonour herself and breed bastards?

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.

This a good point that comes up now and then, my question is this: why doesn’t the people of Westeros ask what Hightower was doing? Shouldn’t they expect stories about the mighty feats of the sword of the morning? In the end these guys failed miserable in protecting the royal family, yet they are not held accountable. Maybe their esteem is holdover for past glories, but it’s real surprising that so many wax over Dayne as the greatest knight of his time, with this legacy.

As too your question, maybe they simply assumed that they had deserted their duties? Like all those other sworn Targ loyalists did in the end? Or that they actually were trying to reach Viserys?

after the fight about killing dany "Always? Suddenly uncomfortable, he found himself recalling Rhaegar Targaryen" .... granted he doesnt come out and say Rhaegar would be better, but he doesnt need to IMO

Always? Suddenly, uncomfortably, he found himself recalling Rhaegar Targaryen. Fifteen years

dead, yet Robert hates him as much as ever. It was a disturbing notion . . . and there was the other

matter, the business with Catelyn and the dwarf that Yoren had warned him of last night. That

would come to light soon, as sure as sunrise, and with the king in such a black fury . . .

I took it to mean that Ned finds it disturbing that Robert’s hatred of Rhaegar stills rules him 15 years after his death, and the consequences of this for his family. There is nothing in the context that suggest he even contemplates Rhaegar’s character.

he is disliking robert more and more

Seeing Robert’s fault is not the same thing as condoning Rhaegar, the comparison is never made.

then finally a little later...."For the first time in years, he found himself remembering Rhaegar Targaryen. He wondered if Rhaegar had frequented brothels; somehow he thought not.".......again not coming out and saying i wish we didnt kill rhaegar, but questioning whether he was so bad

Strange that he himself say that this is the first time in ten years that he remembers him, doesn’t it sort invalidate your previous examples that he often mused over whether Rhaegar would have made a better king then Robert?

Anyway why I agree that it’s natural to assume that Ned approved of Rhaegar allegedly abstaining from visiting brothels, it doesn’t give it much credit, Hitler abstained from alcohol and smoking, that didn’t really mean much did it? And the fact that Ned doesn’t express his approval, suggest that this wasn’t a pattern you could mold Rhaegar’s character from.

Ned's "She was a Stark of Winterfell" does seem to indicate that he is unaware of a marriage between Lyanna and Rhaegar . . . or else that he denied its legitimacy.

Why? She was a Stark of Winterfell, as Catelyn is a Stark by marriage, but really a Tully of Riverrun.

[Mezeh]

I think the marriage wasn’t about establishing any legitimacy for the throne, (IMO Rhaegar never thought it would go so far.) but making the child a true head of the dragon.

I agree. We know from Dany’s vision that Rhaegar expected one more child. If he though that Lyanna would provide him he should have married her. Actually this provides a good explanation of his behavior. A bastard child wouldn’t serve as similarity to Aegon and his sisters would be lost.

[SFDanny]

Sarella, you keep reducing the status of second wife to Rhaegar, a unique position in all of Westeros, to the equivalent of a mistress because Lyanna must "share" with another woman. There is no equivalency in her status or, in my mind most importantly, the status and legal effect on her child. It is as different as night and day. While I have said we don't know enough about the way Lyanna and Elia, or Rhaegar for that matter, think about a polygamous marriage with all of it's ramifications, we do know something of Lyanna's strength of character and her likely reaction to being a mistress and having her child condemned to bastardy. These are entirely different questions. Confusing the two because of possible "sharing" difficulties misses the point entirely.

Also, the "straw man" technique uses a false position attributed to another in order to easily knock down an argument, which in fact no one has advanced. I don't do so with your position about others knowing from the Kingsguard presence at the Tower of Joy that they must be guarding the heir to the throne. Instead, I've answered you question about this with easily understood reasons why others would not have to reach that conclusion.

[Guest Other-in-law]

after the fight about killing dany "Always? Suddenly uncomfortable, he found himself recalling Rhaegar Targaryen" .... granted he doesnt come out and say Rhaegar would be better, but he doesnt need to IMO

while visisting Chataya's with littlefinger he thinks "That was his curse. robert would swear undying love and forget them before evenfall, but ned stark kept his vows. he thought of the promises he'd made Lyanna as she lay dying, and the price he'd paid to keep them." .... he is disliking robert more and more.... later on the next page "the Robert he knew wouldn't have let it happen, but the Robert he had known had never been so practiced at shutting his eyes to things he did not wish to see." then finally a little later...."For the first time in years, he found himself remembering Rhaegar Targaryen. He wondered if Rhaegar had frequented brothels; somehow he thought not.".......again not coming out and saying i wish we didnt kill rhaegar, but questioning whether he was so bad

those were the quotes i was thinking of, and granted i know they dont say damn we should have kept rhaegar, but they can certainly lead to the question "was Rhaegar such a bad guy and could he have been a better king."

I think it's a bit of a stretch to come to any conclusions about Ned's preference for king between the two from those quotes. Avoiding brothels doesn't mean that one will be a good king, or even a good person. Stannis avoids brothels and he orders (in one case, and contemplates in another) ritual human sacrifice of his relatives.

It does say something about a person's attitude toward non-marital sex, though, but even that's not conclusive. Someone could happily father bastards right and left, but still disdain the idea of paying for sex.

[Shewoman]

Enguerrand--I think Ned's comment about "she was a Stark of Winterfell" has to do with her burial in the Wintercrypt. But if she was married to Rhaegar and gave birth to his only surviving male heir and Ned knew it, she should have been burned in the Targaryen manner.

I never got the impression that Lyanna loved Robert or was interested in marrying him--she did, after all, flee from that marriage. If that's so, then her perception that he would not be faithful would be one reason among others not to marry him. But if she loved Rhaegar and accepted his reasoning for their relationship and child (perhaps to create another Head of the Dragon), then the fact that he was married might not be such a problem. In addition, it's been suggested on these boards that Elia was unable to have more children; I know that at some point someone in the books refers to her not being very strong. I'm sorry to be so vague. But if that's true, then the fact that Rhaegar wanted another child and Elia was unable or unwilling to give him one would give Lyanna some advantage in a polygamous marriage

[Sarella]

Enguerrand,

I agree that all Rhaegar was concerned with was creating the third head and that was all he planned for. He certainly didn't plan for the event of his death, which would have led to the death or exile of Lyanna and Jon regardless of whether Aerys or Robert won the war.

I find it hard to believe that he made plans to uphold his and Lyanna's honour (with a secret marriage), when he didn't make plans to uphold Lyanna's life in the event of his (Rhaegar's) death, where she would have been killed or exiled by Aerys or Robert's men. Likewise, I find it hard to believe that he made plans to make the child a Targaryen (with a secret marriage) when he didn't make plans to keep the child alive in the event of his (Rhaegar's) death, where Jon would have been killed or exiled by Aerys' or Robert's men.

I think his plan was to wait until the "changes" after the war, then sort everything out.

The more I think about it, the more and more stupid Rhaegar becomes. He didn't have to forsee The Trident and the sack, but I would have thought that he would plan for the possibility he might die, considering he had the hazardous job of commanding the Targ army in the biggest threat the Targs had ever faced. Even if there was a secret marriage, that did very little to keep Lyanna and Jon safe. It was just dumb luck that Ned made the sacrifice he did, and even then, the child is still considered a Snow, not a Targaryen.

Anyway, since we agree that Rhaegar was concerned with the third head, what is a true head of the dragon? One of Rhaegar's children, a Targaryen, or both? All we really have to go on are Dany's heads, who will most likely be a mixed bag. She is a Targ, but not Rhaegar's child. Any other head will not be Rhaegar's child (unless Aegon makes an appearance), and GRRM has said the third head need not be a Targ. So Rhaegar was wrong, but that doesn't matter. What matters is what he thought a true head was. Of course, we know Rhaegar believed they had to be his children. And we know he didn't believe they had to be of the same mother. But we don't know that he believed they had to be his legitimate children.

I think quite alot indicated she was proud, but perhaps you mean not bound by conventions?

Yes, I'm finding it hard to find the right words to describe what I mean. Lyanna not being proud didn't quite fit but kinda came closest. What I'm trying to say Lyanna was like Arya. Say Lyanna is still alive today. And Jon really is Ned's bastard (by Ashara or Wylla). Would Lyanna scorn Ned and Jon? Would she frown upon Ned for dishonouring himself, and would she reject Jon because is is a bastard? No! She would love Jon like a trueborn nephew, and her opinion of Ned probably wouldn't change.

Yes I would. Why should she want’s dishonour herself and breed bastards?

No I don't think she would want to dishonour herself and breed bastards! I think she would have been content to wait until after the war, marry Rhaegar, and have him legitimize her child. Rhaegar was willing to wait until after the war to do something about Aerys. Why not wait until after the war to take a second wife and legitimize his third child? The idea that Lyanna compelled him to marry her, even though it wasn't in either of their interests (see above point about risking death and/or exile over risking dishonour), doesn't cut it for me.

As too your question, maybe they simply assumed that they had deserted their duties? Like all those other sworn Targ loyalists did in the end? Or that they actually were trying to reach Viserys?

Thank you. That is the kind of answer I've been trying to get out of SFDanny.

[Sarella]

SFDanny,

I agree with you that Lyanna wouldn't be content to be a mistress and father bastards. What I object to, is you trying to use what she said about Robert as "evidence" of that. I agree that she would be content to be second Queen Targaryen and have Rhaegar sleep with Elia, and that she wouldn't have been content to be sole Lady Baratheon and have Robert sleep with other women. But I think it is because she loved Rhaegar and didn't love Robert. Not because of her values regarding her men sleeping with other women. If it was because of that, she wouldn't be content to have Rhaegar sleep with Elia.

Also, we differ on our interpretations of Lyanna's character. I think Lyanna was in love with Rhaegar and willing to do whatever it took to be with him. I don't think she would have insisted he secretly marry her immediately for her honour's sake. I think her strenth of character indicates she would put her honour aside (just like Ned) in order to do what she thought was best. It would be selfish of her to compell Rhaegar to marry her. And all a secret marriage would achieve would be to preserve her honour in her own mind.

Also, the "straw man" technique uses a false position attributed to another in order to easily knock down an argument, which in fact no one has advanced. I don't do so with your position about others knowing from the Kingsguard presence at the Tower of Joy that they must be guarding the heir to the throne. Instead, I've answered you question about this with easily understood reasons why others would not have to reach that conclusion.

Really, you have answered it?! If I am to deem your answer from your posts I would guess your answer is this then:

That even though the best explanation of the KG at the TOJ is that they were guarding their heir, the people of Westeros have chosen an inferior explanation. They believe the KG were at the TOJ guarding Lyanna Stark. Until Ned and co came along and killed them all, then Ned entered and found Lyanna dying. Because Lyanna was not the Targaryen heir to the throne, the KG at the TOJ must have deserted their duties.

If I am incorrect then please set me straight by answering this question: How do you think Varys explains the presence of the KG at the TOJ?

[SFDanny]

SFDanny,

I agree with you that Lyanna wouldn't be content to be a mistress and father bastards.

Ok.

What I object to, is you trying to use what she said about Robert as "evidence" of that.

Why? I don't say it is proof of anything, only that her statement about Robert and her actions at the tourney give us a clue to her character and would support the idea she would stand up for herself and her child. What is so crazy about that?

I agree that she would be content to be second Queen Targaryen and have Rhaegar sleep with Elia, and that she wouldn't have been content to be sole Lady Baratheon and have Robert sleep with other women. But I think it is because she loved Rhaegar and didn't love Robert. Not because of her values regarding her men sleeping with other women. If it was because of that, she wouldn't be content to have Rhaegar sleep with Elia.

My position is we don't know enough about how either Lyanna or Elia thought about being in a polygamous marriage to say much. If a second marriage took place the options of what the three people understood that to mean for each other is far too many to say one must be what happened. Rather what I've tried to point out is the important difference a marriage makes for a child of Lyanna, and I don't really understand how that can be disputed. The lack of any rights or status of a bastard child is evident throughout the series.

None of that is in contradiction to your statement that Lyanna "loved Rhaegar and didn't love Robert." I think you're right. However, love isn't the only factor that makes us do things. Both Lyanna and Rhaegar's concerns for their child has to be considered. I see no convincing argument that says either of them would think it unimportant if Jon is born a bastard. To do so, we have to accept a view of Rhaegar as only concerned about producing another head of the dragon, and Lyanna as so in love with Rhaegar she is unwilling to think of the consequences for her child if he is born a bastard. I don't dispute that Lyanna may well have been in love with Rhaegar, and he may well have seen the need for a third child as paramount, but none of that means they must therefore ignore the effect of bastardy on Jon.

Perhaps the two of them are so wrapped up in their own agendas of love and prophecy that they see nothing else, but I think not. Particularly when we have the continued presence of the Kingsguard at the Tower of Joy to support the idea that they did not forget the importance of marriage for their child.

Also, we differ on our interpretations of Lyanna's character. I think Lyanna was in love with Rhaegar and willing to do whatever it took to be with him. I don't think she would have insisted he secretly marry her immediately for her honour's sake.

I said nothing about immediate, and I don't think it is her honor that is the most important factor. Rather it is the child's status. I can see Lyanna in a love affair with Rhaegar, but when a child is to be born it changes things.

I think her strenth of character indicates she would put her honour aside (just like Ned) in order to do what she thought was best. It would be selfish of her to compell Rhaegar to marry her. And all a secret marriage would achieve would be to preserve her honour in her own mind.

What is she imposing on Rhaegar? Why would Rhaegar be opposed to his child being a legitimate heir to the throne? Is there some part of the prophecy that mandates one of the heads be a bastard? Certainly if Rhaegar had a problem with how any type of relationship with Lyanna would have on his first marriage, then he wouldn't have ran off with her in the first place.

I don't see Lyanna as being selfish in wanting a marriage and Rhaegar as somehow opposed. It is in both of their best interests, and in the best interest of their child that they marry rather than just have a love affair. The have shaken the realm to its roots either way.

Really, you have answered it?! If I am to deem your answer from your posts I would guess your answer is this then:

That even though the best explanation of the KG at the TOJ is that they were guarding their heir, the people of Westeros have chosen an inferior explanation. They believe the KG were at the TOJ guarding Lyanna Stark. Until Ned and co came along and killed them all, then Ned entered and found Lyanna dying. Because Lyanna was not the Targaryen heir to the throne, the KG at the TOJ must have deserted their duties.

No. I answered why many characters would not jump to the conclusion that there was an heir at the Tower of Joy. Ned's cover stories work in explaining Jon. What people think about why the Kingsguard was as the Tower of Joy could be as varied as all the reasons I've given in the past, and I'm sure others might come up with more possibilities. There is no "must" about it. Yes, some could think these men deserted. Some could think they just were unfortunate enough to have met up with Ned and his party as they hid away from the rebels. Others, might think it was terrible timing as they tried to get through Dorne and into exile. Some might even think that these men were stupid enough to stay at the Tower of Joy because that is the last order they were given. Who knows what reason most people come up with to answer any questions they may have about what brought about the confrontation between Ned and the Kingsguard. The point is that Ned's stories work in taking Jon out of the equation.

If I am incorrect then please set me straight by answering this question: How do you think Varys explains the presence of the KG at the TOJ?

I think I have in the above and in my previous posts, but if there is need for further explanation, let me know.

What Varys thinks is an interesting question. He is the one person who we might expect to dig into the events at the Tower of Joy for further explanation. All I can say is that up to the point of when Ned becomes the Hand, he appears to accept Ned's stories about Jon, and we know of no investigation by him into the the history. Doesn't mean it didn't happen, but we have no evidence it did.

It is one reason I wonder if Ned every wrote that letter to Jon. If he did, would any of it spark an interest in the eunuch in Jon's origins and the old history at the Tower of Joy. We will have to wait on that.

[Sarella]

Why? I don't say it is proof of anything, only that her statement about Robert and her actions at the tourney give us a clue to her character and would support the idea she would stand up for herself and her child. What is so crazy about that?

I just don't understand why you won't accept (at all) the inconsistency in your argument. I know it isn't exactly the same, but marrying a man who is already married is similar enough to marrying a man who sleeps around, if you are concerned about your rights and about promiscuity. Even if she was Rhaegar's second wife, she is always going to be viewed as second to Elia. Her children will come after Rhaegar and Elia's. It isn't exactly the same, but it is still a flaw in your argument that you are just dismissing outright.

If she is willing to make these concessions for her and her child (to always come in second), why are you so sure she wouldn't be willing to make a concession and wait until after the war to marry Rhaegar?

Rather what I've tried to point out is the important difference a marriage makes for a child of Lyanna, and I don't really understand how that can be disputed. The lack of any rights or status of a bastard child is evident throughout the series.

Agreed. So tell me this. How did Rhaegar and Lyanna's secret marriage ensure Jon's rights? And if Lyanna hadn't died in childbirth, how were her rights ensured?

Both Lyanna and Rhaegar's concerns for their child has to be considered. I see no convincing argument that says either of them would think it unimportant if Jon is born a bastard.

This is not what I am saying. I agree that neither of them wanted Jon to be a bastard. Let me make it really clear what I AM saying. Let's say they did secretly marry, and Jon is legit. Outcomes:

1) Rhaegar survives, and wins the war. He now presents Lyanna to the world, says that they married in secret, and Jon is their legit son. Everyone has to just believe him. And they probably would. But he would have been better off waiting and having a public marriage (to dispell all doubt and have people accept his new wife better) and then legitimizing Jon (so then nobody can have any doubt that he is legitimate).

2) Rhaegar dies, but Aerys wins the war. It doesn't matter what Lyanna says or who steps forward as witness, Aerys isn't going to accept her or her child. All Starks are traitors. Lyanna and Jon will be killed or exiled.

3) Rhaegar dies, Aerys loses the war. If she is Rhaegar's wife and Jon is legit, they will both be killed or exiled.

The secret wedding doesn't benefit them either way. If Rhaegar had survived, he could have married and legitimized then. And as you can see, Rhaegar didn't survive, and the secret marriage didn't benefit Jon, and wouldn't have benefited Lyanna had she had lived.

What this indicates above all, is that Rhaegar didn't plan for the event of his death. He fully expected to be around after the war. He felt there would be time then to deal with Aerys. Consistent with this would be for him to think there would be time then to marry Lyanna and legitimize Jon, and along with that scenario would come all the benefits of a public wedding.

To do so, we have to accept a view of Rhaegar as only concerned about producing another head of the dragon, and Lyanna as so in love with Rhaegar she is unwilling to think of the consequences for her child if he is born a bastard. I don't dispute that Lyanna may well have been in love with Rhaegar, and he may well have seen the need for a third child as paramount, but none of that means they must therefore ignore the effect of bastardy on Jon.

Once again, I am not saying either Lyanna or Rhaegar would want the child to be a bastard. I am saying that all indications are that they planned to deal with everything (including Jon's bastadry) later.

I said nothing about immediate, and I don't think it is her honor that is the most important factor. Rather it is the child's status. I can see Lyanna in a love affair with Rhaegar, but when a child is to be born it changes things.

Again, what good did this secret marriage do for Jon?

What is she imposing on Rhaegar?

What she is imposing is a secret marriage, when he would benefit more from a public one.

I don't see Lyanna as being selfish in wanting a marriage and Rhaegar as somehow opposed. It is in both of their best interests, and in the best interest of their child that they marry rather than just have a love affair.

As stated above, it isn't in either of their interests or Jon's. Therefore the only reason would be for the sake of Lyanna's honour.

No. I answered why many characters would not jump to the conclusion that there was an heir at the Tower of Joy. Ned's cover stories work in explaining Jon.

Yes, Ned's stories explain Jon to the people of Westeros. Ned's stories about Jon do not explain to the people of Westeros why there were three KG at the TOJ. I am repeatedly asking you the latter, and you are repeatedly answering the former!

What people think about why the Kingsguard was as the Tower of Joy could be as varied as all the reasons I've given in the past, and I'm sure others might come up with more possibilities. There is no "must" about it. Yes, some could think these men deserted. Some could think they just were unfortunate enough to have met up with Ned and his party as they hid away from the rebels. Others, might think it was terrible timing as they tried to get through Dorne and into exile. Some might even think that these men were stupid enough to stay at the Tower of Joy because that is the last order they were given. Who knows what reason most people come up with to answer any questions they may have about what brought about the confrontation between Ned and the Kingsguard.

Thank you. So the people of Westeros think that the presence of the KG can be explained by any of the above. The people of Westeros concede that three true members of the KG could be doing something other than guarding their king. They know what the KG vows are, and that HT and Dayne were true knights of the KG. Yet they are willing to accept that they may have been guarding the TOJ even if the Targ heir wasn't there.

What Varys thinks is an interesting question. He is the one person who we might expect to dig into the events at the Tower of Joy for further explanation. All I can say is that up to the point of when Ned becomes the Hand, he appears to accept Ned's stories about Jon, and we know of no investigation by him into the the history. Doesn't mean it didn't happen, but we have no evidence it did.

And? How do you think Varys explains the presence of the KG at the TOJ? Look, I'll just go ahead and answer it myself.

Varys must also accept one of the other explanations. Because if he firmly believed the best explanation of the KG at the TOJ was the presence of the Targ heir, he would go looking for that heir. Where would it be? With someone who had been at the TOJ when the three KG died. So he'd investigate all children with Wylla, all children with Howland, and all children with Ned. It wouldn't take much to realize who the Targ heir was. He would see through Ned's story straight away.

Now, because Varys does, as you say, accept that Jon is Ned's bastard, the above investigation must never have taken place. Therefore Varys must not think the KG were at the TOJ guarding the Targ heir. Therefore Varys, who knew HT, Dayne and Whent as well as anyone, thinks there must be another reason why these honourable knights of the KG were there. Varys would know that these knights would do the right thing no matter what, and he believes the best explanation of the KG at the TOJ is one other than guarding the Targ heir. He is in a better position to decide than we are. I therefore think it more likely that the KG were at the TOJ for Rhaegar and the prophesy, than because the targ heir was there.

[Mezeh]

Sarella there is a serious flaw in your argument. You should have asked what benefits would Lyanna and her child get from marriage. The answer is rather obvious. Why the supposed marriage had to be secret is another question and it was already answered in the thread above.

Why not to wait with marriage and legitimize the child afterwards? The answer is simple. Trueborn children still have better status then legitimized bastards and besides only king could do it. Rhaegar wasn’t a king so he had to rely on his father decision and wait for his death. Neither looks like a good option. Aerys wasn’t old and could live another thirty years.

Another thing – you assume that Aerys would harm his grandchild because his mother was Stark. There is no reason to think so. Aerys was mad for sure but still not mad enough to seriously harm his family. More probably that wife status would protect Lyanna and her child in the case of Rhaegar’s death.

Besides unlike his father Rhaegar should have considered later reconciliation with Starks. The fact that he married Lyanna and not just abducted her would make such reconciliation much easier.

[SFDanny]

I just don't understand why you won't accept (at all) the inconsistency in your argument. I know it isn't exactly the same, but marrying a man who is already married is similar enough to marrying a man who sleeps around, if you are concerned about your rights and about promiscuity. Even if she was Rhaegar's second wife, she is always going to be viewed as second to Elia. Her children will come after Rhaegar and Elia's. It isn't exactly the same, but it is still a flaw in your argument that you are just dismissing outright.

I believe you have just confirmed my original point. You are hung up on what are going to be the sexual relationships between Rhaegar, Lyanna, and Elia. I've said repeatedly we don't know enough about the nature of what these three thought of their polygamous marriage to make a judgement on whether this is an issue. All kinds of things are possible, for instance Lyanna and Rhaegar may have an understanding that because they love each other they will only be "sleeping" with each other and Elia is just out of luck. Or they could be planning the best ménage a trois this side of the Summer Isles. WE DON"T KNOW if that or any other option is what is going on.

It is also not the point.

What I'm trying to get you to focus on instead of the sexual side is what this means for Jon.

There is no inconsistency in trying to get you to look at this from the point of view of what is in the best interest of a child of Rhaegar and Lyanna, and again it has nothing to do with who is screwing whom. It has everything to do with the difference of being a bastard in Westerosi society and being "true born." That means everything from being able to sit at the high table at social events to whom one can marry, what kind of life is open to a person, and what one can inherit from their parents. Do we really believe these two are incapable of looking at this from their child's best interests while they are humping like bunnies in the Tower of Joy?

If she is willing to make these concessions for her and her child (to always come in second), why are you so sure she wouldn't be willing to make a concession and wait until after the war to marry Rhaegar?

There is a huge, HUGE difference between being the second son of the crown prince and being his bastard. Jon will always be second in line to the throne after Aegon, but such a life is so, so much better than one of scorn and ridicule. Why do you dismiss this with the idea that Lyanna should wait for a public wedding? Why? A public wedding does nothing to change their situation as they hide at the Tower of Joy. They still have the Starks, the Baratheons, the Martells, and King Aerys all pissed as hell at them. Not a to mention dear old dad may not approve of a wedding and they would have to run off and find a septon who didn't fear being cooked slowly.

Agreed. So tell me this. How did Rhaegar and Lyanna's secret marriage ensure Jon's rights? And if Lyanna hadn't died in childbirth, how were her rights ensured?

If he is true born, he has rights he can demand including the throne if Aegon dies. If Jon is a bastard he has no claim to anything. Same with Lyanna. A mistress has no claim to anything; the mother of a prince has claim to many things. It's really pretty simple.

Now, the politics of the "game of thrones" may not be so simple, but we don't even get to start to play the game without a marriage.

This is not what I am saying. I agree that neither of them wanted Jon to be a bastard. Let me make it really clear what I AM saying. Let's say they did secretly marry, and Jon is legit. Outcomes:

1) Rhaegar survives, and wins the war. He now presents Lyanna to the world, says that they married in secret, and Jon is their legit son. Everyone has to just believe him. And they probably would. But he would have been better off waiting and having a public marriage (to dispell all doubt and have people accept his new wife better) and then legitimizing Jon (so then nobody can have any doubt that he is legitimate).

2) Rhaegar dies, but Aerys wins the war. It doesn't matter what Lyanna says or who steps forward as witness, Aerys isn't going to accept her or her child. All Starks are traitors. Lyanna and Jon will be killed or exiled.

3) Rhaegar dies, Aerys loses the war. If she is Rhaegar's wife and Jon is legit, they will both be killed or exiled.

The secret wedding doesn't benefit them either way. If Rhaegar had survived, he could have married and legitimized then. And as you can see, Rhaegar didn't survive, and the secret marriage didn't benefit Jon, and wouldn't have benefited Lyanna had she had lived.

Once again it benefits Jon. Secondarily, it benefits Lyanna, but to your points:

(1)If Rhaegar survives he still faces the opposition of his father, but if he is already married he is in a better position to demand acceptance from him. I think here you too easily dismiss the problems of Rhaegar becoming king and acknowledging his bastard son. Mezeh deals with this well.

(2) What a mad Aerys may do speaks to the need to hide the two of them away more than it does when a marriage should be announced.

(3)The fact Robert sits the throne makes all plans moot, but that doesn't mean Rhaegar and Lyanna would have ignored the consequences of whether Jon is true born or not.

What this indicates above all, is that Rhaegar didn't plan for the event of his death. He fully expected to be around after the war. He felt there would be time then to deal with Aerys. Consistent with this would be for him to think there would be time then to marry Lyanna and legitimize Jon, and along with that scenario would come all the benefits of a public wedding.

This not a case of whether Rhaegar took out life insurance before he marched to the Trident. It's a simple matter of whether or not he was willing to have his son born a bastard or he would take the step to marry before his birth and give his son the benefits of being true born. It's not a hard thing to do, and it is a thing that makes sense form both Rhaegar's and Lyanna's perspective. It also is consistent with the Kingsguard's presence at the Tower of Joy.

Once again, I am not saying either Lyanna or Rhaegar would want the child to be a bastard. I am saying that all indications are that they planned to deal with everything (including Jon's bastadry) later.

Where are these "all indications"? I've yet to see anything in the ways of a textual reference or even a logical argument that shows it was their plan to marry later and legitimize their child once Rhaegar becomes king - whenever that might be.

Again, what good did this secret marriage do for Jon?

see above.

What she is imposing is a secret marriage, when he would benefit more from a public one.

As stated above, it isn't in either of their interests or Jon's. Therefore the only reason would be for the sake of Lyanna's honour.

By ignoring all the obvious benefits somehow you think this strengthens your arguments. Instead you only show you can ignore things that undercut your premise. Not a good thing for our discussion.

Yes, Ned's stories explain Jon to the people of Westeros. Ned's stories about Jon do not explain to the people of Westeros why there were three KG at the TOJ. I am repeatedly asking you the latter, and you are repeatedly answering the former!

Thank you. So the people of Westeros think that the presence of the KG can be explained by any of the above. The people of Westeros concede that three true members of the KG could be doing something other than guarding their king. They know what the KG vows are, and that HT and Dayne were true knights of the KG. Yet they are willing to accept that they may have been guarding the TOJ even if the Targ heir wasn't there.

Amazing! How many times do I have to say there are many other possibilities to why the Kingsguard are at the Tower of Joy? Please, get this - there is a difference between a probability and a possibility. The people of Westeros could have, and probably did believe many different reasons why Ned and the Kingsguard met up at the Tower of Joy. That has nothing to do with what we as readers can do in evaluating the different possibilities and what is probable given the facts as we know them.

And? How do you think Varys explains the presence of the KG at the TOJ? Look, I'll just go ahead and answer it myself.

Varys must also accept one of the other explanations. Because if he firmly believed the best explanation of the KG at the TOJ was the presence of the Targ heir, he would go looking for that heir. Where would it be? With someone who had been at the TOJ when the three KG died. So he'd investigate all children with Wylla, all children with Howland, and all children with Ned. It wouldn't take much to realize who the Targ heir was. He would see through Ned's story straight away.

Now, because Varys does, as you say, accept that Jon is Ned's bastard, the above investigation must never have taken place. Therefore Varys must not think the KG were at the TOJ guarding the Targ heir. Therefore Varys, who knew HT, Dayne and Whent as well as anyone, thinks there must be another reason why these honourable knights of the KG were there. Varys would know that these knights would do the right thing no matter what, and he believes the best explanation of the KG at the TOJ is one other than guarding the Targ heir. He is in a better position to decide than we are. I therefore think it more likely that the KG were at the TOJ for Rhaegar and the prophesy, than because the targ heir was there.

"He is in a better position to decide than we are." No he is not. We as readers have insights from the many POVs that Martin gives us. Varys the character does not have this benefit. For instance we have the benefit of Ned's dream in which he tells us the conversation between himself and the Kingsguard. Varys doesn't know this. We know that Ned found his sister in a "bed of blood." Varys doesn't know this. We know that Ned acknowledges to himself that he has had to live his lies for 14 years and pay the price of them. Varys does not. On and on, we have benefits that the characters do not, not least of which is that we evaluate the probabilities knowing this is a fantasy series and having some kind of familiarity with the author's style. None of which Varys or any other character can take into account.

[Sarella]

SFDanny,

Saying that we don't know about the Rhaegar, Elia and Lyanna triangle doesn't mean that what Lyanna said about Robert says nothing about her sexual values. It is quite convenient that you take Lyanna's comment and say it speaks volumes about Lyanna's strength of character, but nothing about her sexual values. You are just twisting it to fit however you want. I could just as easily say it says nothing about her strength of character and speaks volumes about her sexual values. But I am willing to meet you halfway and say we cannot make use of her comment because we don't know what it means.

Anyway, it is a separate point to that of ensuring Jon's rights.

You and Mezeh have completely missed the point about what use did the secret marriage do Jon. You have both answered what it would have done if Rhaegar hadn't died. Perhaps I was unclear so I'll reword my question. Knowing how things have turned out 14 years later, what good has the secret marriage done Jon?? The secret marriage in no way protected his rights. He is considered a bastard, and is now a man of the NW. What happened to his birthright that was ensured by Rhaegar and Lyanna's secret marriage?!?!

You don't need to convince me that it would be bad to be a bastard, and that Rhaegar and Lyanna didn't want Jon to be a bastard. I agree. The fact that you keep repeating this over and over again instead of addressing the actual arguments I am making in my posts is telling me that you have no answers to my arguments.

Why do you dismiss this with the idea that Lyanna should wait for a public wedding? Why? A public wedding does nothing to change their situation as they hide at the Tower of Joy.

Neither does a secret one. And the additional problems with a secret one are that if Rhaegar loses the war, nobody knows Jon is their king, and if Rhaegar wins the war, it will seem dodgy when Rhaegar just shows up with a second wife. There could always be doubt over her status and her son's. If Rhaegar and Aegon die, what is to stop Viserys from trying to take the throne over Jon, on the basis that there is no proof he is legitimate?

If he is true born, he has rights he can demand including the throne if Aegon dies. If Jon is a bastard he has no claim to anything. Same with Lyanna. A mistress has no claim to anything; the mother of a prince has claim to many things. It's really pretty simple.

Thanks for once again stating the obvious instead of adressing my point. What I said was that if Rhaegar died they would have no claim to anything even if there was a secret marriage. If Rhaegar dies, Lyanna has no proof that she is his wife and that Jon is legit. And even if she does have a witness or certificate, everyone is going to be pissed with her for her part in starting the war. Some may be more pissed than others (Aerys). You think her saying "oh, but Rhaegar and I were married" is going to ensure her safety and that of her child?

Here, read this very carefully; if they married secretly and Rhaegar won the war, the secret marriage does nothing for them. They could have just waitied and had a public one before Jon was even born. If they married secretly and Rhaegar lost the war, the secret marriage does nothing for them. Jon ends up dead or secretly hidden away and deprived of his rights. EITHER WAY A SECRET MARRIAGE WOULD HAVE DONE NOTHING FOR THEM. THEREFORE, A PUBLIC WEDDING WAS THEIR BEST OPTION.

On top of that, we have evidence that (1) Rhaegar expected to win the war, and (2) that he was putting off dealing with Aerys until after the war. But you are trying to say that Rhaegar considered the possibility that he might lose the war and dealt with Lyanna straight away. That is completely inconsistent with what we know of Rhaegar's plans. And even if it is true, it would never have worked (see above paragraph).

Now, the politics of the "game of thrones" may not be so simple, but we don't even get to start to play the game without a marriage.

Good point. So a secret marriage is better than nothing. I am inclined to agree. We would be in complete agreement if you rephrased your point to be that Rhaegar and Lyanna may have married because even though it wouldn't ensure Lyanna's or Jon's rights, it was better than nothing. I would still disagree that that is what most likely happened, though.

(1)If Rhaegar survives he still faces the opposition of his father, but if he is already married he is in a better position to demand acceptance from him. I think here you too easily dismiss the problems of Rhaegar becoming king and acknowledging his bastard son. Mezeh deals with this well.

If Rhaegar won the war, he could easily have married Lyanna before she gave birth to Jon. Problem solved!

(2) What a mad Aerys may do speaks to the need to hide the two of them away more than it does when a marriage should be announced.

Agreed. That doesn't address my point though. If Rhaegar won the war and overthrew Aerys, there would be no problems arranging his marriage to Lyanna.

(3)The fact Robert sits the throne makes all plans moot, but that doesn't mean Rhaegar and Lyanna would have ignored the consequences of whether Jon is true born or not.

Alright, so they wanted Jon to be trueborn just for their sakes? Just so they could sleep easy knowing they wouldn't have a bastard child?

This not a case of whether Rhaegar took out life insurance before he marched to the Trident. It's a simple matter of whether or not he was willing to have his son born a bastard or he would take the step to marry before his birth and give his son the benefits of being true born.

Once again I draw your attention to Jon's complete lack of the benefits that Rhaegar "ensured" him.

Where are these "all indications"? I've yet to see anything in the ways of a textual reference or even a logical argument that shows it was their plan to marry later and legitimize their child once Rhaegar becomes king - whenever that might be.

The logical argument goes like this. Rhaegar didn't plan for his death. He rode to The Trident confident of victory. There is textual evidence to support this. He was planning to implement changes when he returned. There is textual evidence to support this. Therefore, consistent with Rhaegar expecting victory and putting off important changes until later, he would expect victory and put off his important marriage until later.

I am yet to see textual reference or logical argument that Rhaegar did plan for his death, and put ANY measures AT ALL in place in case he did die.

By ignoring all the obvious benefits somehow you think this strengthens your arguments. Instead you only show you can ignore things that undercut your premise. Not a good thing for our discussion.

I am not ignoring the obvious benefits. I agree that being a bastard is bad. Being true born is good. What I am saying (and this is the bit you are ignoring) is that a secret marriage didn't produce these benefits, because Jon turned out to be raised a bastard and denied his rights anyway.

Finally, about the reasons for the KG at the TOJ. So you are essentially saying that it is only because you know what the KG said at the TOJ, Ned's promises and sacrifices, and because you know about the bed of blood, that you think it is most likely that the KG were guarding the Targ heir? Thanks, that makes more sense. All this time we have been arguing based solely on the vows and duties of the KG.

So, (1) If you are going to put so much weight on what the KG said, you must put equal weight on everything they said. It is not fair to dismiss the "far away" part, but put so much weight on everything else. The "far away" part indicates that they were doing something other than just guarding the targ heir in a tower the whole time. (2) All we can fathom from Ned's promises and from the bed of blood is that he promised to keep Jon safe, not that Jon was trueborn.

[Sarella]

Why the supposed marriage had to be secret is another question and it was already answered in the thread above.

It didn't have to be secret if it occured after Rhaegar had overthrown Aerys, which there is textual evidence that he intended to do.

Why not to wait with marriage and legitimize the child afterwards? The answer is simple. Trueborn children still have better status then legitimized bastards and besides only king could do it. Rhaegar wasn’t a king so he had to rely on his father decision and wait for his death. Neither looks like a good option. Aerys wasn’t old and could live another thirty years.

Again, Aerys would be out of the picture.

Another thing – you assume that Aerys would harm his grandchild because his mother was Stark.

Yep, just like he demanded Ned's head just becasue he was a Stark.

There is no reason to think so. Aerys was mad for sure but still not mad enough to seriously harm his family.

Hahahaha, where is your evidence?!?! We know for fact that Aerys was willing to burn his two grandchildren to death with wildfyre.

More probably that wife status would protect Lyanna and her child in the case of Rhaegar’s death.

I really doubt it. Who would stick up for Lyanna's rights in the case of Rhaegar's death, when there is no proof she is his wife? And when she had such a key role in starting the war? And when so much trouble went in to finding Rhaegar's first wife, Elia. And when polygamy isn't a common and accepted occurance?

Besides unlike his father Rhaegar should have considered later reconciliation with Starks. The fact that he married Lyanna and not just abducted her would make such reconciliation much easier.

Agreed. But this once again means he expected to live. If he expected to live, he would have waited and had a public marriage, for everyone to see that Lyanna married him consentually, that it was a legit marriage, and that he didn't just abduct and rape her.