Jump to content

The Rhaegar + Lyanna = Jon Thread Part VII


Werthead

Recommended Posts

To clarify a bit, Dany thinks Rheagar died for the woman he loved in her first chapter in the series. This is almost certainly Lyanna, imo, as he can hardly be said to be dying for Elia, unless you get "out there".

In the House of the Undying, Dany sees Rhaegar dying and whispering a woman's name.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We know that Robert says loudly and repeatedly that it was abduction and rape. But there is the odd hint that he does not entirely believe it himself. For example at one point he muses to Ned something like: "Rhaegar won, damn him. He has Lyanna now, and I have Cersei." Would he really think Rhaegar and Lyanna were together in death if there hadn't been a consensual relationship between them? Though possibly it merely shows that he thinks of women mostly as possessions.

I think you make a valid point, but I do not buy it. At the very least, when Robert says the line to Ned, Robert believes that Ned believes it. I think Robert showed very little self-inspection and almost entirely devoid of contradictory information. Once Robert set his mind to something, there was nothing that could deter him (though, to be fair, he flip-flopped on killing Dany). I cannot see Robert saying something like "Rhaegar raped and kidnapped YOUR SISTER" to Ned unless Robert believed it.

As far as the line "Rhaegar won; he got Lyanna" I see it as you opine: Robert saw woman as possessions; he used them and then promptly forgot they existed. Note that the women he COULD NOT do that with (Cersei and Lyanna) cause him the most pain and trouble. I do not think Robert believes that Rhaegar got Lyanna "fairly"; Robert certainly does not believe that Lyanna went willingly. Again, use context clues: would Robert Baratheon go to Winterfell to lay roses on Lyanna's grave if he thought Lyanna had shanghi'd him for Rhaegar? It certainly would not be to "keep up appearances"; hell, Robert NEVER did that!

And all the evidence I state is "confirmed" is that which is not subject to much interpretation (ie- where Lyanna died). Because much of what we know about the ToJ and the birth of other children and even the "Promise Me" evidence comes through fever dreams, hallucinations and "visions" it is too contingent to be as accurate as hard facts. Anything that is subject to interpretation is subject to misinterpretation. Therefore, any of Dany's visions, etc are not as solid as they need to be to be considered "facts."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with you that Dany says that, but then when she is asking Arstan Whitebeard (Barristan) she seems upset by the fact that he left Elia and wonders if Elia was a horrible person. I don't know if Robert realized he was being delusional because he didn't have the info to make that conclusion. But regardless I still adamantly stick to R+L=J and will be the first to admit I'm wrong, but I'm not, when the info proves it. Since GRRM has said that he will directly inform us of Jon's parentage all we can do now is wait patiently... BUT I"M IMPATIENT!!! lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you make a valid point, but I do not buy it. At the very least, when Robert says the line to Ned, Robert believes that Ned believes it. I think Robert showed very little self-inspection and almost entirely devoid of contradictory information. Once Robert set his mind to something, there was nothing that could deter him (though, to be fair, he flip-flopped on killing Dany). I cannot see Robert saying something like "Rhaegar raped and kidnapped YOUR SISTER" to Ned unless Robert believed it.

Certainly your privilege, it is something that I myself am on the fence about. If I was arguing the other way, I think that the best line would be that Robert had sold himself a story that it was abduction and more or less believed it, having managed to close his eyes to contrary evidence, and was just left with a niggling discomfort about it. This might fit with his insane hatred of all Targaryens, which does feel a little like he is overcompensating for something. And doesn't Ned think in AGoT that Robert is very good at closing his eyes to things he does not want to see?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Certainly your privilege, it is something that I myself am on the fence about. If I was arguing the other way, I think that the best line would be that Robert had sold himself a story that it was abduction and more or less believed it, having managed to close his eyes to contrary evidence, and was just left with a niggling discomfort about it. This might fit with his insane hatred of all Targaryens, which does feel a little like he is overcompensating for something.

Or its true blind hatred. Again, Robert was, if nothing else, a very sincere person (probably one of his few noble qualities). I think he said what he meant and meant what he said. I think he hated the Targs because Robert really believed that she was raped by a Targ. And if Robert had, in fact, just sold himself on the story of Lyanna being raped and murdered than its a distinction without a difference: it does not matter if Robert talked himself into it or not; once he believes it, that is all that matters

In other words, if you hooked up Robert Baratheon to a lie detector and asked him "Do you believe that Lyanna Stark was kidnapped and raped by Rhaegar Targaryen" and he said "yes" he would pass the test. Everything after that is besides the point.

And doesn't Ned think in AGoT that Robert is very good at closing his eyes to things he does not want to see?

This is true, but unavailing to the point. If Robert is simply ignoring contrary evidence, he is basically George W. Bush in that he is so convinced that he is right that there is no need to expose himself to the dissenting views. I think in these instances Robert has not considered the other side for the very reason you suggested in Ned's quote: he blind's himself to that information; like it never existed. Its not that Robert does not believe what he is saying; its that he is completely oblivious to any evidence that may be to the contrary. In that vein, I still believe that Robert truly believed every word that he said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know that the obvious answer is that Wylla or Ashara Dane, but let us look at this. Wylla is a servant and Ned was not likely to have had much interaction with her. Ashara does not fit because of the time frame. Ned was at war for one year and came home to a baby Robb. To travel from the North to Dorne, which is where Lyanna was, would take many months.

Just for clarity

Catelyn Came home to Jon already at Winterfell.

"The the wars were over at least, and Catelyn rode to Winterfell, Jon and his wet nurse had already taken up residence." (GOT 65)

I'm not sure if this changes your timeline.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been thinking of possible sources of information about R+L=J -- what about the Maester w/ the glass candle. Seems he has been able to learn information from it and I don't see why he couldn't possibly learn of Jon in this fashion.

Another source could be the 3EYEd Crow, it is possible he could also discover the truth behind Jon's parentage and seeing as how Bran will be in the Wild North of the Wall he is ideally placed for Bran to inform. Jon...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yup, I believe it's true.

But for the record, even if it is, Jon's still a bastard. I remember seeing people saying how it would make him the rightful King of Westeros, but Rhaegar and Lyanna weren't wed.

Also, as far as Ashara Dayne goes, people assume she was sitting around in Dorne. She could have been elsewhere. She ended up there in the end, obviously, since she threw herself from the window (or was thrown, who knows), but she could have "met" Ned somewhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yup, I believe it's true.

But for the record, even if it is, Jon's still a bastard. I remember seeing people saying how it would make him the rightful King of Westeros, but Rhaegar and Lyanna weren't wed.

As has been stated many times in these threads, the Targaryens practiced polygamy, so it isn't clear at all that Rhaegar and Lyanna weren't wed. If so, Jon is the rightful heir to the throne.

Also, as far as Ashara Dayne goes, people assume she was sitting around in Dorne. She could have been elsewhere. She ended up there in the end, obviously, since she threw herself from the window (or was thrown, who knows), but she could have "met" Ned somewhere.

Most folks don't assume Ashara was sitting around Dorne the entire time of the war until Ned arrives in Starfall. That is especially true since Martin has specifically said we shouldn't assume such a thing. That is, however, quite different than seeing a meeting between Ned and Ashara as likely, three or four months into the rebellion and presumably in rebel-held territory, when Ashara is such a prominent loyalist. Could happen, but no evidence it did. Which, of course, is why Ashara as Jon's mom can't be ruled out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

as contradictory evidence to the 3-eye'd crow having knowledge of Jon's parents I would say that its unlikely...

If he had a wish to inform Jon he could have used Sam as a vassal of the information. Obviously this isn't cold hard proof or anything, but if he knew and didnt' tell Sam the only reasons I can think of are...

A. Didn't fit in with HIS timeline

B. He was unable to forsee that Sam was trustworthy enough to contact Jon (which I would doubt if he was able to determine who Jon's parents are

C. Jon's parentage is irrelevant to his goals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As has been stated many times in these threads, the Targaryens practiced polygamy, so it isn't clear at all that Rhaegar and Lyanna weren't wed. If so, Jon is the rightful heir to the throne.

Most folks don't assume Ashara was sitting around Dorne the entire time of the war until Ned arrives in Starfall. That is especially true since Martin has specifically said we shouldn't assume such a thing. That is, however, quite different than seeing a meeting between Ned and Ashara as likely, three or four months into the rebellion and presumably in rebel-held territory, when Ashara is such a prominent loyalist. Could happen, but no evidence it did. Which, of course, is why Ashara as Jon's mom can't be ruled out.

I was more going by the whole "But Dorne is far away so the timeline doesn't work", I noticed someone saying that a few posts up.

As for Rhaegar and Lyanna, to me it somewhat is clear unless there's some insanely trustworthy individual who happened to witness the wedding and then went into hiding for 16 years without saying a word. Power is all in perception, and even if Rhaegar and Lyanna had some secret wedding, it seems clear that, 16 years later, nobody of any importance has any idea about it. Nobody in the series has even suggested or suspected that Rhaegar and Lyanna actually ran off and got married. Maybe Howland Reed could come out and say "Hey, they got married, I was totally there!", but who's going to actually believe that save for perhaps a few northmen who trust him implicitly? If they were wed, it's clearly not common knowledge, it's not even a dirty rumor. It's nothing, it's not even a thought. I think too much stock is being put into "under the sight of gods", because who cares if they got married first if nobody knows about it and nobody would believe it anyway even if someone did? At most that would make Jon perhaps the "technical heir" but that requires someone actually buying into the wedding theory, buying into the fact that Jon Snow is a product of that marriage, and giving him an army to go take it.

I dunno, I just don't think rightful heir really means very much in this case, short of Dany showing up, finding out from Howland Reed (I can't really come up with anyone else who would know, unless the Kingsguard told someone), trusting him so much for some reason that she'd be willing to make Jon the king, and then doing so. But we'll see, I suppose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What about the Targaryen violet eyes? Children take their eye colour from their fathers. If Rhaegar was Jon's father, Jon would have the same violet eyes, not Ned's. Also, taking a woman to wife by force was common. The Bolton Bastard did it, even tho he later let his "wife" starve to death locked in a tower cell. Put that with the supposed rape of Lyanna and the practice of polygamy among the Targaryens and it would be possible for Rhaegar to have "married" Lyanna. But that doesn't mean that Rhaegar could be Jon's son, unless genetics are non-existant in the Westeros universe.

And what about the woman named "Willa"?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What about the Targaryen violet eyes? Children take their eye colour from their fathers. If Rhaegar was Jon's father, Jon would have the same violet eyes, not Ned's. Also, taking a woman to wife by force was common. The Bolton Bastard did it, even tho he later let his "wife" starve to death locked in a tower cell. Put that with the supposed rape of Lyanna and the practice of polygamy among the Targaryens and it would be possible for Rhaegar to have "married" Lyanna. But that doesn't mean that Rhaegar could be Jon's son, unless genetics are non-existant in the Westeros universe.

And what about the woman named "Willa"?

Children don't take their eye color from their fathers. It's all about dominant and recessive genes, you know Mendel's Laws and all that jazz. So if the theory is true then obviously the Stark eye color dominanates over the Targaryens eye color, just like it would seem the Tully eye color normally domiantes over Stark. And depending on how the genes are distributed you'll have an occasional recessive gene come through, meaning thats why Arya also has the Stark eyes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sable899:

Children not teke their eye colour from their fathers. Eye color dibends childs mother and father gromosons. Y is blue and X is brown and X is bominant. If mother is Y+X=brown and father is Y+Y=blue, then children bossibilities are: Y+Y, Y+Y, X+Y, X+Y. No idea how violet or burble eye color works.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was more going by the whole "But Dorne is far away so the timeline doesn't work", I noticed someone saying that a few posts up.

We can rule out Jon being conceived when Ned visits Dorne after the Tower of Joy events. The timeline rules it out because we know when Jon is born - eight or nine months prior to Dany, who is born nine moons after the sack of King's Landing. None of which rules out a secret meeting between Ashara and Ned eight or nine months prior to the sack. However to do so we need to imagine a meeting with either Ashara going behind enemy lines to meet with Ned or Ned leaving his troops to meet with Ashara someplace in royalist hands. The former, though hard to see believe, seems much more likely than the latter. At least to me. The real problem is we have nothing to indicate such a meeting took place. All of which may change when Dance comes out.

As for Rhaegar and Lyanna, to me it somewhat is clear unless there's some insanely trustworthy individual who happened to witness the wedding and then went into hiding for 16 years without saying a word. Power is all in perception, and even if Rhaegar and Lyanna had some secret wedding, it seems clear that, 16 years later, nobody of any importance has any idea about it. Nobody in the series has even suggested or suspected that Rhaegar and Lyanna actually ran off and got married.

What happens if Jon is the rightful heir and whether or not he is the rightful heir are very different questions. My guess is that he is the heir but will never either claim or sit the throne.

With the question of whether or not Jon is the heir due to a marriage between Lyanna and Rhaegar, I'd disagree that there isn't even a suggestion that such a marriage took place. I've argued that the actions of the Kingsguard trio at the Tower of the Joy strongly suggests that the heir to the throne is there with them. If the heir isn't there, and they truly know the information Ned recounts in his dream, then at least one of them should be on his way to Dragonstone to discharge the first duty of the Kingsguard and guard their new king. There are other things about the character of both Rhaegar and Lyanna that I would argue would point to a wedding, but those rely on what little we know about their characters from a few scattered memories throughout the books.

Maybe Howland Reed could come out and say "Hey, they got married, I was totally there!", but who's going to actually believe that save for perhaps a few northmen who trust him implicitly? If they were wed, it's clearly not common knowledge, it's not even a dirty rumor. It's nothing, it's not even a thought. I think too much stock is being put into "under the sight of gods", because who cares if they got married first if nobody knows about it and nobody would believe it anyway even if someone did? At most that would make Jon perhaps the "technical heir" but that requires someone actually buying into the wedding theory, buying into the fact that Jon Snow is a product of that marriage, and giving him an army to go take it.

I'd argue the only person who really needs to be convinced of Jon's heritage is Daenerys. If she accepts it then her power would carry the day for any doubters. But as I've said I don't think it really matters because, while Jon may find out who his parents are and whether he is really a bastard, I think Jon is committed to the Night's Watch.

I dunno, I just don't think rightful heir really means very much in this case, short of Dany showing up, finding out from Howland Reed (I can't really come up with anyone else who would know, unless the Kingsguard told someone), trusting him so much for some reason that she'd be willing to make Jon the king, and then doing so. But we'll see, I suppose.

It would mean a lot to both Jon and Dany to discover that Jon is a Targaryen, even if he never takes the throne. And I wouldn't think it depends on Howland spilling the story, though he might give us some of it if he ever shows up. There was at least one other person, probably Wylla, who found Ned with Lyanna's body, so the story doesn't depend on just Howland. His children, Wylla, and anyone else who was at the Tower (I've argued for a maester being present and think Marwyn is the most likely candidate for that role) will have part of the story at least. In fact, I'd argue that it is much more likely this mystery unravels in bits and pieces from different sources. At least I'd hope so. For it all to depend on Howland showing up and telling us everything makes it too predictable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dany, perhaps, but why Jon? Targaryen or Stark, he's still Ned's son. If he never takes the throne, he'll assuredly stay on the Wall and keep his vows. What difference then whether or not he's Rhaegar's get?

Jon would get the answer to a question he has had his whole life concerning who is his mother and learn about both who his father really is and why the secret had been kept from him all these years. That seems likely to be important to him. I think it would be important news to anyone in similar circumstances. Also, while I think Jon would choose to stay and do his duty with the Night's Watch, I don't think the temptation to claim what is rightfully his will be an easy thing to turn his back on. Just my take on what he will do, and I certainly could be wrong in this. Perhaps he claims the throne and marries his aunt; they live happily ever after with many little Targaryens to take after them. I hope not, but it could happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With the question of whether or not Jon is the heir due to a marriage between Lyanna and Rhaegar, I'd disagree that there isn't even a suggestion that such a marriage took place. I've argued that the actions of the Kingsguard trio at the Tower of the Joy strongly suggests that the heir to the throne is there with them. If the heir isn't there, and they truly know the information Ned recounts in his dream, then at least one of them should be on his way to Dragonstone to discharge the first duty of the Kingsguard and guard their new king. There are other things about the character of both Rhaegar and Lyanna that I would argue would point to a wedding, but those rely on what little we know about their characters from a few scattered memories throughout the books.

I do agree that their actions are very strange. That said, where exactly were they before that? Because until the Sack of Kings Landing, even if Lyanna and Rhaegar were married and even if Jon was their legitimate child, he wasn't the heir until baby Aegon and Aerys were killed (or 'killed', if Aegon actually is alive). One Kingsguard tailing Lyanna and her legitimate child (if indeed that was the case) makes sense, but three? When they weren't at Kings Landing or the Trident, I assumed it was because they were with Lyanna for some reason, but I guess I'm not clear on why that would be even if Jon is legit. He would have come after Aerys (obviously), Rhaegar, and Aegon in the succession; all of them should have had more guards. Seems odd to say "Okay, let's have our three best guard the pregnant lady just in case she has a son who will be fourth in line for the throne at best, while we leave that new guy whose Daddy got mad and quit his job as Hand to guard the King by himself". I just always assumed Rhaegar ordered them to guard Lyanna, which he might have done regardless of being married to her.

It would mean a lot to both Jon and Dany to discover that Jon is a Targaryen, even if he never takes the throne. And I wouldn't think it depends on Howland spilling the story, though he might give us some of it if he ever shows up. There was at least one other person, probably Wylla, who found Ned with Lyanna's body, so the story doesn't depend on just Howland. His children, Wylla, and anyone else who was at the Tower (I've argued for a maester being present and think Marwyn is the most likely candidate for that role) will have part of the story at least. In fact, I'd argue that it is much more likely this mystery unravels in bits and pieces from different sources. At least I'd hope so. For it all to depend on Howland showing up and telling us everything makes it too predictable.

I doubt Wylla's testimony would mean much. I think a Maester's might, but I find it odd that he would have kept silent all these years. Reed would have out of friendship and loyalty to the Starks, and Wylla who knows, but why a Maester? Certainly possible, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I doubt Wylla's testimony would mean much. I think a Maester's might, but I find it odd that he would have kept silent all these years. Reed would have out of friendship and loyalty to the Starks, and Wylla who knows, but why a Maester? Certainly possible, though.

Why would he? Marwin seems like the smart long term thinker. If he is's a targ loyalist (Which I think seems fairly likely) then protecting the secret of prince rhaegars last son seems important. Maybe Wylla is a smart girl too and can keep her mouth shut.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Wylla's role in this is to be Jon's "stunt mom"--someone who says that she is Jon's mother, giving Ned someone to mention if he's ever questioned on the point--which is exactly what happens in his conversation with Robert in which Robert asks Ned the name of Jon's mother and Ned, rather reluctantly, says it's Wylla.

I don't think Wylla really is Jon's mother because if she was, I don't see why Ned wouldn't tell Jon (who in my opinion has the right to know who his mother was) and anyone else who asked. "Jon Snow's mother is a Dornish wetnurse" isn't likely to interest very many people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

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