The Lyanna + Rhaegar = Jon Thread (Part V)

[Guest Other-in-law]

[quote name='Kevin_Lannister' post='1556900' date='Oct 15 2008, 16.36']I do think that letter Ned gave Varys might come into the picture at some time.[/quote]
There's absolutely zero confirmation that any such letter exists. Ned only even thought about it when he was in a sensory deprived stupor from being locked in pitch darkness for months, feverish and malnourished.

[Rinso]

[quote name='Prince of the North' post='1556734' date='Oct 15 2008, 14.33']So, are you saying that Martin hasn't done anything to even [i]suggest the possibility[/i] of R+L=J? If so, then I guess that's where we'll have to agree to disagree. I believe Martin has laid the groundwork that this is, at least, [i]a possibility[/i] (personally, I think it's more than that).[/quote]

What I'm saying is that we have a number of mirky clues, most of which mentioned only in AGOT and most of which can mean anything else outside of the context of the theory.
By now we are past the middle of the series - 4 out of 7 books are done and (hopefully) the 5th is close to finish. For these 4 books, [i]nothing[/i] that suggests [i]strongly and without a doubt [/i]that Jon might be a hidden Taragryen prince has happened.

[quote name='Prince of the North' post='1556734' date='Oct 15 2008, 14.33']I also believe Martin will do something new and unexpected with this stock fantasy "hidden heir" cliche.[/quote]
I'd prefer it if he just don't use that cliche. You said couple of times before something along the lines of "he's writing fantasy after all". Well, yes - of course he does; however that doesn't mean that he [i]has[/i] to use the most tired cliches of the genre.

[Shewoman]

Rinso, we're told that Rhaegar's giving the Crown of Love and Beauty to Lyanna at Harrenhal--passing his own wife to do so--was a shock (Ned remembers it as the moment "when all smiles died"). That doesn't prove that they were lovers, but it indicates that the attention Rhaegar paid her was considered to be unexpected and inappropriate by those who observed it. We don't know how Lyanna felt about it, although when Ned remembers her death, he remembers her holding a bouquet of dead blue roses. The Crown of Love and Beauty Rhaegar gave her at Harrenhal was made of blue roses. I think Rhaegar's action in presenting the bouquet and Lyanna's of saving it makes your suggestion that Martin hasn't done anything to suggest R+L questionable. I'm not saying these things prove R+L, but they can easily be understood as indicating it.

Martin has also clearly established that there's some mystery to Jon's parentage. Catelyn and Cersei suggest that Ashara Dayne is Jon's mother; Ned himself tells Robert it's Wylla; Edric Dayne agrees, but knows only what he's been told (he wasn't alive when Jon was born). It seems that Martin is inviting not only his characters but us to solve the parentage mystery.

Martin has also made sure that we know that Lyanna's disappearance was understood by many people--including her brother Brandon--as having been instigated by Rhaegar and that this was apparently the final straw that led to Robert's Rebellion. We know that Rhaegar was married to Elia, but so far Martin has not said anything about any relationships Lyanna may have had. Certainly we may hear something about that in the future, but at this point the only man Martin has suggested Lyanna has been with is Rhaegar. That may turn out to be a red herring, but it's what we've got now.

It seems to me that any theory about Jon's parentage has to explain Ned's reluctance to identify Jon's mother even to Jon and Catelyn (Ned himself, of course, says he's Jon's father). He does tell Robert she's Wylla in a conversation that he's clearly very uncomfortable with. I don't think Wylla is Jon's mother; we've got some timeline issues there. 1) Ned and Jon make it back to Winterfell from the South before Catelyn and infant Robb do and the boys are apparently close in age. 2) It is my understanding that after Lyanna disappeared Ned did not see her until he went to the ToJ after the Sack of KL. It's been suggested that Wylla was at the ToJ as a wetnurse, but clearly Ned couldn't have impregnated her at that point (after the war) and arrived home with a child close in age to Robb, who was conceived a few months into the war on Ned and Catelyn's wedding night. And, if Wylla is Jon's mother, what's the secrecy for? Why not tell Catelyn, Cersei, Jon, and anyone else who expresses an interest? Wylla's a wetnurse apparently employed by the Daynes; what could be the danger in identifying her? She's obviously had and nursed a child of her own already, since she is a wet nurse, and so far we've heard nothing to suggest who (or where) that child or its father might be. Therefore Ned wouldn't be particularly concerned about her honor--and, in any case, in that culture servants didn't have honor in the sense that the nobility did. Wylla's never going to make a dynastic marriage like Catelyn did.

I don't think Arthur Dayne as Jon's father solves anything. If he truly was as honorable as everyone--including Ned--says, it doesn't fit his character. And why not tell people Arthur is Jon's father if it's true? He can't be hurt by rumors, since Ned killed him. It also raises the question of why the 3 KG were at the ToJ. If they were ordered there in order to protect a child who was to be the third head of the dragon--or just a Targaryen heir, although we don't know if R+L=marriage--that makes some sense. But if Jon is Dayne's kid, what were the other KG there for? I don't think they would have thought that, with a war going on, they should spend their time protecting the illegitimate child of a KG who broke his vows.

And, by the way, why would a child of Arthur's need protecting? As a KG, Arthur isn't in line to become Lord of Starfall (just as Jaime, much to Tywin's displeasure, can't inherit Casterly Rock). Since Arthur can't inherit, I don't think a child of his would be in the line of succession--and I never got the impression that Starfall was so wealthy and powerful that people would kill to inherit it. If R+L=J, that child would clearly need protecting (his half-brother and sister having just been murdered and his father having died in battle), and just as clearly there would be people who would want to kill him in order to prevent his taking the throne.

[Kevin_Lannister]

[quote]There's absolutely zero confirmation that any such letter exists. Ned only even thought about it when he was in a sensory deprived stupor from being locked in pitch darkness for months, feverish and malnourished.[/quote]

True but I guess it's something I want to believe. Varys with Tyrion seemed to act in a similiar way as Varys did with Ned. I think this may reveal a little, like I think Varys has a soft spot lol, and I think the info (if it is R + L = J) that would be in the letter would be extremely important to Varys who deals with information. How would he handle it since hes masquarding a series of plans for the revival of the Targaryens, I dont know. But it may be very well that the answer of where he is now heading in the books and this letter could be tied together. Which if thats the case, it could be the platform in which GRRM tells us the answers of the past without a Ned POV. (though a Jon POV and it could happen as soon as Dance if thats the case, possibly in the final Jon chapters, Varys shows up at the wall.)

[quote]I don't think Arthur Dayne as Jon's father solves anything. If he truly was as honorable as everyone--including Ned--says, it doesn't fit his character. And why not tell people Arthur is Jon's father if it's true? He can't be hurt by rumors, since Ned killed him. It also raises the question of why the 3 KG were at the ToJ. If they were ordered there in order to protect a child who was to be the third head of the dragon--or just a Targaryen heir, although we don't know if R+L=marriage--that makes some sense. But if Jon is Dayne's kid, what were the other KG there for? I don't think they would have thought that, with a war going on, they should spend their time protecting the illegitimate child of a KG who broke his vows.[/quote]

Some might argue that once a war was started for Lyanna she became a chip in this war. A piece so to speak. The targayens are dealing with rebels, why? because of this girl. So why would they just hand her over to the enemy. Kings don't do this to rebels, they do what they want especially in Ary's case. So she would become, in a way, the property of the King, especially if the prince did it. So if Rhagar told Dayne that he was going to fight a war with vast armies, a few kingsguard wont make a huge differnce. He may turn to him and say protect her, keep her out of harms way. It could have been an order to the LC and dayne who wouldnt have been able to turn it down. Now it could also be possible while protecting her/holding her hostage in a way, they fell in love then or he impregnated her then but then it wouldnt explain why she took off in the first place unless your new point is, that she fell in love with Dayne and ran off with Rhaegar and him to not marry Robert. All of this is a streth but better than anything but the R + L, which I hope it isnt.

[quote]Martin has also clearly established that there's some mystery to Jon's parentage. Catelyn and Cersei suggest that Ashara Dayne is Jon's mother; Ned himself tells Robert it's Wylla; Edric Dayne agrees, but knows only what he's been told (he wasn't alive when Jon was born). It seems that Martin is inviting not only his characters but us to solve the parentage mystery.[/quote]

Yes and I belive theres not enough evidence to support any of the theories right now, especially in my mind, the one thats stated in the book and thats the Wylla one. It seems it must be something incredible if its not the answer given in the book so widely, which I believe to be wrong mostly for the reasons you given especially the timeline which I know GRRM tells us not to obsess over but the fact Robb and Jon are so close to age is enough proof, which is a good reason you wouldnt tell Cat but you would tell Robert (if you were Ned) who the mother is.

Edit - Had the wrong quote in for my Dayne explanation which would confuse the reader.

[Prince of the North]

[quote name='Rinso' post='1557768' date='Oct 15 2008, 23.06']What I'm saying is that we have a number of mirky clues, most of which mentioned only in AGOT and most of which can mean anything else outside of the context of the theory.
By now we are past the middle of the series - 4 out of 7 books are done and (hopefully) the 5th is close to finish. For these 4 books, [i]nothing[/i] that suggests [i]strongly and without a doubt [/i]that Jon might be a hidden Taragryen prince has happened.[/quote]
Then we completely agree here after all :)
[quote name='Rinso' post='1557768' date='Oct 15 2008, 23.06']I'd prefer it if he just don't use that cliche. You said couple of times before something along the lines of "he's writing fantasy after all". Well, yes - of course he does; however that doesn't mean that he [i]has[/i] to use the most tired cliches of the genre.[/quote]
Yes, you do seem to have your heels dug in pretty solidly against the stock fantasy "hidden heir" cliche. Personally, I look forward to seeing what Martin does with it. If, in the end, Martin does nothing with it then I will be happy with that as well ;)

[Shewoman]

I've probably said this, but I think Martin may make Jon be a "secret heir" but kill him off without Jon ever knowing who his parents were--or perhaps, have him know what his ancestry could offer him but refuse it (to let Dany rule, in order to have Winterfell himself . . . ). I'm not going to say that's never been done in fantasy lit, but these options would ring a bit of a change on that old trope.
'

[Kevin_Lannister]

[quote name='Shewoman' post='1558486' date='Oct 16 2008, 15.52']I've probably said this, but I think Martin may make Jon be a "secret heir" but kill him off without Jon ever knowing who his parents were--or perhaps, have him know what his ancestry could offer him but refuse it (to let Dany rule, in order to have Winterfell himself . . . ). I'm not going to say that's never been done in fantasy lit, but these options would ring a bit of a change on that old trope.
'[/quote]

I know GRRM says that he tries to avoid the forums so he wont change anything to the story he had in mind, but hes had to hear of this equation. Im thinking he did orginally have it as RLJ, seeing all the hints are mainly in AGOT, but he shied away after all the talk of it progressed into a science, only giving us the story meera spoke of (harrenhall tourney), as any hint in later books. I think hes changing his mind for the better and the only route he can go, if he wants to save this part of the story, is to make it a shock whos Jon's parents are, totally left field from what we thought and still fit (dayne) or take it like he planned and not do anything like normal fantasy writers do, like you said (heir who doesnt choose the predicatable outcome, heir who doesnt know but we do, heir who loses). Either of those would work for me, left field or a not so predictable outcome with the knowledge.

[A wilding]

[quote name='Kevin_Lannister' post='1558653' date='Oct 16 2008, 22.58']Im thinking he did orginally have it as RLJ, seeing all the hints are mainly in AGOT, but he shied away after all the talk of it progressed into a science, only giving us the story meera spoke of (harrenhall tourney), as any hint in later books. I think hes changing his mind for the better ...[/quote]
YMMV, but from what we know of GRRM, I think that he would consider that making such a drastic change to the plot just to screw with the internet savvy reader, leaving all those pointers to R+L=J hanging loose and unresolved, would be a betrayal of his art. (And would certainly not make the series "better" by any reasonable standard.)

Plus whenever he approaches this subject, he implies he would never to such a thing, saying for example that he has always known the fate of all the major characters, and that art is not a democracy.

[Shewoman]

I don't think the clues are all that murky. Rhaegar's actions at Harrenhal certainly suggest some interest in Lyanna, and her crying as he sang could be understood as suggesting that she was emotionally affected by him (or that he sucks at singing). It seems to be generally assumed in Westeros that Lyanna and Rhaegar went off together. That doesn't prove it's true, but that does seem to be a popular assumption. Robert clearly believes it (or at least pretends to).

Only a member of the royal family could order the Kings Guard to go somewhere, and it's hard to come up with a reason for their being ordered to protect a child of Arthur's--and, if Arthur really is Jon's father, why does Ned say he's Jon's father? That means that the KG at the ToJ are either hiding from the war (although they explain to Ned why they're there by saying "We swore a vow") or else a member of the royal family (to whom the KG swears vows)told them to be there. That's suggestive.

It's also interesting that Ned, who was so close to Lyanna, never has any negative thoughts about Rhaegar. In Clash of Kings, pp. 380-81, he thinks of Rhaegar for the first time in years. Robert, on the other hand, keeps saying things like "In my dreams I kill him every night." We know that Ned spoke with Lyanna and made promises to her before she died; that probably means that he knows the truth of how/why/with whom she vanished just before the war started.

[Kevin_Lannister]

[quote]Only a member of the royal family could order the Kings Guard to go somewhere, and it's hard to come up with a reason for their being ordered to protect a child of Arthur's--and, if Arthur really is Jon's father, why does Ned say he's Jon's father? That means that the KG at the ToJ are either hiding from the war (although they explain to Ned why they're there by saying "We swore a vow") or else a member of the royal family (to whom the KG swears vows)told them to be there. That's suggestive.[/quote]

Im not saying Jon HAS to be Daynes, just saying theres a lot of theories and explanations on why things happened besides the dreaded equation fans came up with. I dont feel strong either way, for or against, but for this author, i find it more suprising if its true and that jon is a hidden heir persay. Why 3 KG were at the TOJ seems to be the number 1 evidence for a lot of pro-RLJ people. I tried to explain before that, lets say at the least, R and L were in love but Jons not theres so the equations wrong, theres a lot of ways you can debunk why KG are there. I felt in the Jaime flashback when hes thinking about what Rhaegar said to him before he left, that it showed Rhaegar was really relaxed and didnt think he would lose and that the king thoiught this too and was more scared of Tywinn. If this was the case and Rhaegar is expecting a quick victory, then him asking Jaime to stay with the king and 3 to stay to guard his love and 3 to come with him to battle it would make sense. Either way she became a chip in the game of thrones and noone has the right to tell what a king or prince should do, at least not in westeros. so if robert and neds fighting to get her back, thats more of a reason for the king to want to keep her. and if she falls in there hands, then the enemy is getting what they want. so why wouldnt they send top knights to guard there most valuable chip in this game, the reason these people are rebelling. plus it would make more sense if the prince loved her, but it doesnt have to mean shes pregeant. i know a lot of people will throw around other things to support it like "bed of blood" but at the very least again lets say she was pregeant and the kids were guarding the heir. Theres no proof that her and the child didnt both die or that she died and the child didnt. Theres no solid proof either way. Its all up to the author but i just really hope he doesnt do the classic hidden heir thing because.....

[quote]YMMV, but from what we know of GRRM, I think that he would consider that making such a drastic change to the plot just to screw with the internet savvy reader, leaving all those pointers to R+L=J hanging loose and unresolved, would be a betrayal of his art. (And would certainly not make the series "better" by any reasonable standard.)[/quote]

well i guess i worded it wrong, but what i meant was that i heard time and time again martin answer (cuz when people ask questions they ask the same ones) that hes not an architect, hes a gardener. He didnt know the end when he began this story. He planted the seeds to it (like how he knew the first bran chapter thats it) and he lets it grow. So i didnt mean to say that hed change the story for internet fools, i meant that hes the type of writer who goes with the flow. And the flow right now is not rlj. It hasnt been since around before the 3rd book.

[SFDanny]

[quote name='Kevin_Lannister' post='1559948' date='Oct 17 2008, 19.27']Im not saying Jon HAS to be Daynes, just saying theres a lot of theories and explanations on why things happened besides the dreaded equation fans came up with. I dont feel strong either way, for or against, but for this author, i find it more suprising if its true and that jon is a hidden heir persay. Why 3 KG were at the TOJ seems to be the number 1 evidence for a lot of pro-RLJ people. I tried to explain before that, lets say at the least, R and L were in love but Jons not theres so the equations wrong, theres a lot of ways you can debunk why KG are there. I felt in the Jaime flashback when hes thinking about what Rhaegar said to him before he left, that it showed Rhaegar was really relaxed and didnt think he would lose and that the king thoiught this too and was more scared of Tywinn. If this was the case and Rhaegar is expecting a quick victory, then him asking Jaime to stay with the king and 3 to stay to guard his love and 3 to come with him to battle it would make sense. Either way she became a chip in the game of thrones and noone has the right to tell what a king or prince should do, at least not in westeros. so if robert and neds fighting to get her back, thats more of a reason for the king to want to keep her. and if she falls in there hands, then the enemy is getting what they want. so why wouldnt they send top knights to guard there most valuable chip in this game, the reason these people are rebelling. plus it would make more sense if the prince loved her, but it doesnt have to mean shes pregeant. i know a lot of people will throw around other things to support it like "bed of blood" but at the very least again lets say she was pregeant and the kids were guarding the heir. Theres no proof that her and the child didnt both die or that she died and the child didnt. Theres no solid proof either way. Its all up to the author but i just really hope he doesnt do the classic hidden heir thing because.....[/quote]

I think you're missing the point of the Kingsguard being at the Tower of Joy. The problem isn't that Rhaegar can't order them to do almost anything, while he is alive, but rather why the hell they are [i]all three still there[/i] guarding Lyanna after they know Rhaegar is dead, Aerys is dead, Elia and her children are dead, and the heir to the Targaryen throne is unguarded by any of their members? The argument centers around the vows these three men took to protect their king as their first and foremost duty, and why it seems they are forsaking those vows by staying and guarding the mistress of a dead prince. Now, there maybe a "lot of ways" to explain this contradiction, but outside a Targaryen heir to the throne being at the Tower when they are there I can't think of any [i]good[/i] ones. If that is true, then Jon is the most likely candidate.

[BeanCounter]

Hey all. I honestly haven't thought or read much about this in a while, so I'm a bit rusty and hope I don't ruin the direction of the conversation. :) Also I hope I don't get any details wrong after my time away. (I'd be so mortified!) But let's see if I have this one right.

When I first heard the theory that created this thread, I thought it was crazy and unnecessary; what was wrong with the straightforward N+W? I've changed my mind over the years, partly because of this "fact" that I hope I still remember: when Cat first came to Winterfell with an itty-bitty Robb in her arms, she found Wylla and a similarly itty-bitty Jon were [i]already in residence[/i] there.

Based on this, and trying not to speculate too much, we know that Cat and Wylla have met. I assume they more or less "lived together" for several months. (Although admittedly, they may have been living at opposite ends of a very large Winterfell.) We know that over the next fifteen years or so, Cat periodically asked Ned about who gave birth to Jon, and it always bothered her that he couldn't tell her. So we're left with this: if Cat met Wylla, knew something about Wylla, and never believed that Wylla was Jonmom, then why should I believe it? For his part, Ned doesn't encourage her to think Wylla is The Mom; he just asks her to drop the topic.

Of course someone out there will observe that this is not a reason to believe R+L=J. I'd say that's a correct observation. But this would certainly need to be explained by anyone who claims N+W, which no longer satisfies me.

[SFDanny]

[quote name='BeanCounter' post='1560071' date='Oct 17 2008, 23.24']when Cat first came to Winterfell with an itty-bitty Robb in her arms, she found Wylla and a similarly itty-bitty Jon were [i]already in residence[/i] there.[/quote]

Actually, no, it just says that Jon and his wet nurse are there when Catelyn arrives. It doesn't say who the wet nurse is.

[quote name='A Game of Thrones']The Starks were not like other men. Ned brought his bastard home with him, and called him "son" for all the north to see. When the wars were over at last, and Catelyn rode to Winterfell, Jon and his wet nurse had already taken up residence. ([i]AGoT[/i] 55 US Hardback)[/quote]

There is no evidence that Catelyn ever meets or knows of Wylla.

[BeanCounter]

All right then. Nevermind, I guess. But don't consider me mortified. I don't mind confusing "Wylla" with "Jon's wetnurse" after so long away. :-p

[BeanCounter]

Edit: double post. Oops.

[SFDanny]

[quote name='BeanCounter' post='1560085' date='Oct 18 2008, 00.48']All right then. Nevermind, I guess. But don't consider me mortified. I don't mind confusing "Wylla" with "Jon's wetnurse" after so long away. :-p[/quote]

no problem, welcome back, by the way. ;)

[BeanCounter]

Thanks for the welcome. :)

All right, as long as I'm sitting here and offering reasons not to believe various theories, here's another attempt. I observed that Rhaegar's wife Elia is Dornish, and the ToJ is in/near the Dornish mountains.

Here begins the speculation. Now if the familiar equation R+L=J were to hold, then either
a. Rhaegar took Lyanna as a second wife (highly irregular and not to be assumed without good reason) or else
b. Jon would turn out to be a bastard after all (and not a true heir, but that's beside the point and I'd rather not go down that road atm).
Either way, wouldn't Jon's very existence be rather offensive to the Martell line? The same way it offends Cat? If so, this would raise the question of why any Dornish lords like the Daynes would (knowingly) participate in protecting the child, which occurs in every R+L=J theory I'm aware of.

Obviously most of this post is my own speculation, but I'm just trying out ideas and seeing how they fit. I'd rather do it by raising questions instead of proposing a grand unifying theory.

[SFDanny]

[quote name='BeanCounter' post='1560106' date='Oct 18 2008, 01.35']Thanks for the welcome. :)

All right, as long as I'm sitting here and offering reasons not to believe various theories, here's another attempt. I observed that Rhaegar's wife Elia is Dornish, and the ToJ is in/near the Dornish mountains.

Here begins the speculation. Now if the familiar equation R+L=J were to hold, then either
a. Rhaegar took Lyanna as a second wife (highly irregular and not to be assumed without good reason) or else
b. Jon would turn out to be a bastard after all (and not a true heir, but that's beside the point and I'd rather not go down that road atm).
Either way, wouldn't Jon's very existence be rather offensive to the Martell line? The same way it offends Cat? If so, this would raise the question of why any Dornish lords like the Daynes would (knowingly) participate in protecting the child, which occurs in every R+L=J theory I'm aware of.

Obviously most of this post is my own speculation, but I'm just trying out ideas and seeing how they fit. I'd rather do it by raising questions instead of proposing a grand unifying theory.[/quote]

Both are good questions, so let me give you my answers, for whatever that is worth.

a. I believe Rhaegar and Lyanna were married, and I think so for many reasons, but the most important is the fact Ned meets all three remaining loyal members of the Kingsguard at the Tower of Joy. The most likely explanation for all three to be there after they know (as shown in their discussion with Ned) that Aerys, Rhaegar, and Elia and her children are all dead - while Prince Viserys sits without a member of the Sworn Brothers to guard him on Dragonstone - is that their vows tell them they must guard the heir to the throne at the Tower of Joy. There are really only two candidates for who that heir could be - a child of Lyanna's if she married Rhaegar, or Aegon, who must have somehow been secreted out of King's Landing. The latter seems highly unlikely, while the former points to Jon as the most likely candidate for Rhaegar and Lyanna's son.

b. I think Jon's existence [i]did[/i] pose a threat to the Martell line, but that line is extinguished during the Sack of King's Landing. So, if the Martells know about Lyanna and her child their antipathy would be a very distant and faint feeling compared to the rage they felt for the brutal rape and murder of Elia and her children. With the Daynes, they would be helping the true heir of Rhaegar to live in a world dominated by their enemies. For a family that has been as loyal as the Daynes that is not hard to see as a likelihood.

btw, while we know Ned can see the Red Mountains of Dorne from the Tower of Joy, we don't know on which side of the border the tower sits. It could easily be in the neighborhood of Summerhall - a favorite haunt of Rhaegar, or any place else on the Reach side of the border.

[Shewoman]

The 3 KG explain their presence at the ToJ by saying they swore a vow. I think it likely that this vow was made to a member of the royal family, since it doesn't seem likely that these men would decide to sit the war out in Dorne. We don't know when they got there, but it's clear from the conversation Ned remembers having with them (although Martin has said that's sort of a feverdream) that they know what Jaime did and about the deaths of Aegon and Rhaenys. And yet they don't go to Viserys and his mother (Rhaella?). IF R+L=J, then Jon is the heir to the Targaryen throne because his father and grandfather are both dead and the line of descent moves from Aerys to his eldest son (Rhaegar) to HIS eldest son--who was Aegon, but he is dead too. That leaves Jon. I don't know that this is the strongest evidence for R+L=I find Harrenhal to be pretty indicative--but it is suggestive.

SF Danny is right; Catelyn found Jon and a wetnurse at Winterfell when she returned, but so far we know nothing else about the wetnurse.

Bean Counter, I don't remember a lot of Martells being brought into R+L. Arthur Dayne was Rhaegar's closest friend and the Daynes supported the Targaryens in the war. Meera's story of Harrenhal in ASOS suggests that Ned and Ashara developed the friendlies there (Edric Dayne was told by his Aunt Allaria that Ashara suicided because of Ned). The Daynes are appreciative of Ned's coming to Starfall after Lyanna's death (not that they know she's dead), telling them what happened to Arthur and returning his sword, the family sword. So what've the Martells got to do with this? The really odd thing to me about this is that the current Lord of Starfall is named Edric, nicknamed Ned. Ned was a great guy, but he did kill their son and, possibly, contribute to their daughter's suicide (if she did suicide).

If we have to bring Martells into it, I don't know whether they're ever particularly aware of Jon Snow's existence--and if they are, they'd know him as Ned's bastard, sired during the war, since that's what Ned says. No one in the series ever suggests that Jon might be Lyanna's and Rhaegar's child.

SF Danny, I like your last post.

It is, by the way, my impression that the Martells are so upset by the murders of Elia, Rhaenys, and Aegon that they probably aren't thinking of the possibility that Rhaegar and Lyanna had a child, particularly since no one else seems to be thinking that either.

[Ziden]

I would like the idea that Jon's mother is Ashara Dayne, and that He will end up receiving the sword dawn, because he has daynes blood in him. Or the fact that maybe Jons mother is just some random woman, of no noble decent. That would be cool as well, because in my mind, (and i am pretty sure this has been said before) it would be cool if there was one powerful and important character in this series who is not of any noble heiriatge (sp)/ and is honestly just a normal person, and as they say in the NW that one can rise high regardless of there nobility.