Jon is not a Targaryen

[Lord Stark]

You misunderstand the point of my exercise. This is a useful tool in seeing other theories, which better explain the facts. If Lyanna's child look like a Targaryen, Eddard can't raise the child as his own because it would be easy for anyone to make the connection. So this means he must give the child to someone to raise and who wouldn't create suspicion. But it still asks the question, could anyone raise Rhaegar's child in Westeros without fear of discovery? If the child looked Targaryen the mother would most likely need at least one of these two traits: violet eyes, blond hair. But a mother can't suddenly claim to have a child out of nowhere, or the conspiracy would be uncovered in a second. This is a simple point that most people can't understand.

If Lyanna had a child that looked Targaryen, then things would have played out different. So far we do not know any child born at that time that look Targaryen. The story has unfolded the way it has and so we go by how it was unfolded, not by how it could have, because there are a million what if's. What if's have nothing to do with what has played out already. If Lyanna gave brith to a Targaryen looking child, we have yet to see that child and have no reason to think there is.

If the child looked targaryen, then Ned may not have been able to take it to Winterfell, but he still could have. Some think Jon is the son of Ashara Dayne, and Ned could have used that to hint who he was.

There is nothing to hint at a 'mother' raising a child out of no where, and so this in no way harms the conspiracy.

Do you think Ned went to the ToJ already knowing everything? He made his plans once he saw the child, not before.

I'm not saying R+L=J meets no facts. I'm saying it fails at many points (Wylla, Catelyn, and Ashara). But you're last statement is what proves why R+L=J is so popular. The fact Martin hasn't shown us another candidate doesn't mean Jon should be accepted by default. It just means the obvious. He hasn't introduced the character yet. But people don't say "I think Jon is Lyanna's child, because he is the best candidate right now", they say R+L=J meets everything, which it doesn't. As I have said many times, proof Lyanna had a child is not proof Jon is that child.

How many times did you say to me you can't bring up the fact that GRRM hasn't finished the serries yet, and so that can't be used for a theory? Could there be another child we have yet to meet? Yes, but we have not met him/her yet, and so there is no reason to think there is until GRRM does hint at it.

I am saying Jon is the best candidate right now because there is no other one. Give me one other candidate we have met that is more likely then Jon?

Lyanna plus her child are two people.

Ned isn't found by 'them' until Lyanna is dead, and so she doesn't count. I also doubt a child found Ned. Maybe Wylla had a child in her arms, but you don't say that a baby found you.

No one reads the points I try to make. If Ned can trust Wylla, he can trust Catelyn. This is a blatant contradiction. And just look at the logic you're using. So he has time enough to talk to her, which can allow for Ned to trust her? These aren't rational explanations. If you base trust with someone on matters relating to such a conspiracy as this despite knowing them for only a few months, that's a totally irrational move. But it's the fact he can leave her in the south with the full confidence that she won't tell. This makes no sense whatsoever. Really, if she knows about Lyanna's child, there are only two options. Kill her or making her go with someone he can trust and who knows about Rhaegar's child. Howland Reed is a perfect candidate. The only other scenario is she doesn't know about Lyanna's child, which means she wasn't at the ToJ.

I don't think you ever listen to my point because you just say the same thing over and over without addressing what I say. If Wylla was there before Ned, then Ned has no control over what she knows. Ned needs wetnurse for a child that will die without one. He is FORCED to use Wylla because she is a WETNURSE. Weather she knows or not we do not know. Just because she is at the ToJ we can't say for sure she would know, but it is likely she does. You also don't know what kind of person Wylla is, and therefore cannot say Ned can't trust her, not that he would have much of a choice since he, NEEDS her.

You really think Ned would kill a wetnurse? Have you read the same book as me? Ned holds his honor high, and the only thing we know he has done against honor is that he might have had a bastard, and he lied to save the lives of his children before he was killed. He is not a man to kill a woman. You can't force Wylla to stay away from her own house. She is a servant to House Dayne and therefore her not returning would look pretty bad on Ned.

I don't understand why you don't understand the logic that Ned needs Wylla for a wetnurse.

You aren't realizing my arguement. It is not possible to have a conspiracy pass the light of day if it involves assuming a child out of nowhere. A pregnancy lasts about 9 months. So for her to play a part in assuming Jon's mother, she must have been pregnant up until the time Lyanna had a child. But if she's pregnant through all this, why would she go by herself to the Tower of Joy? Now, here's another fact that goes against her "role" in R+L=J. It isn't known until Lyanna dies that she would have to assume the child as her own. So if she had a miscarriage or her child died soon after birth, she couldn't let anyone else know about it. If she did reveal that information, people would wonder why her child suddenly came back from the dead. So since she has no motive to keep the secret before Lyanna dies, it only makes sense if she loses her child right after the ToJ. But what happens if Wylla's child doesn't die? Where did that child go? Now don't you see how convoluted this theory must be. Wylla, who is at least 8 months pregnant, travels a good distance in order to help Lyanna give childbirth. Her child suddenly dies right after Lyanna's child is born, which makes her the perfect candidate to claim "Jon" as her own. This doesn't work.

You do not know that Wylla was pregnant, and therefore this falls apart. This is Westeros, a medieval world where it takes months to get information from one side of the realm to the other. You do not know how long it has been since Wylla has been to Starfall. Some woman do not show they are pregnant until they are many months into their pregnancy. One of my friends didn't show until 4 months, and then she didn't even grow that much.

Westeros is a big place, we do not know where Wylla has been up until the ToJ, and therefore you cannot say we know she was pregnant or if she was, that she couldn't hide that fact. It is up to you to show that she was pregnant at this time, or that she was near people she knew well pregnant.

Here is a a good rule in determining evidence. An explanation is not proof something happened, unless it's the only explanation possible. Since there's only a few ways to explain a "bed of blood", it holds up as evidence she was pregnant. Not definitive evidence, but still evidence. That's not the same as the so called "hints" people use to say Jon is Lyanna's child.

I don't understand what you are tryingto say here. We both have agreed it is likely she gave brith. People say Jon is the child of Lyanna because he is the most likely person. You haven't given any other persons likely enough to be her child, and has you said in this thread before, saying GRRM hasn't finished the serries yet isn't reason enough to throw someone else out there. GRRM might have a child off screen, but we have not seen him/her yet, and so have no reason to guess it's true. We guess on what we know so far, which is all a person can do because we are not GRRM, and do not know what he has planned.

This statement isn't true. Really, from a logical standpoint, it makes more sense to have Wylla be Jon's mother. But then you need to reconcile what happened to Lyanna's child. Merely substituting Wylla into what we know about the facts (having her at the ToJ, claiming to be Jon's mother, and Eddard showing full confidence in her) doesn't hold up.

If Wylla is Jon's mother, why hint it from him and his wife and yet have everyone in Starfall know? That isn't very logical, as there is no reason not to tell your own son who his mother is if it is Wylla.

I'm not saying I have trouble with people saying it's a possible explanation. I have trouble with what you did in the quote I highlighted previously. Say it is the best theory, when it isn't.

It is the best theory that we know. Others may believe Wylla is Jon's mother, but we know more then the people of Westeros. We learn things from Ned that others would not know. Because we know this other information we see things that others in Westeros would not see. Wylla is not a better explanation, because there is then no reason to hide who Jon's mother is.

And you're still aren't getting what I'm saying. Let be more clear here. I would have no trouble with Eddard taking Wylla into the conspiracy (I'd still think it's dumb, but it would be consistent) IF he told Catelyn the truth. But that's not the case. What your saying is it's alright to trust someone out of necessity without having reasons to do so, but it's not alright to trust someone who you have a fourteen year relationship with. This doesn't work on any level if Jon is Lyanna's child.

Um no necessity to have Wylla? Have you forgotten there is a child that needs to be feed? What does Ned need to tell Catelyn for? You seem to think everything would work out fine if he told her, that there is no chance that anyone else would find out, which is not logical. Ned needed Wylla, no if or buts about it. He had a baby to feed and could not do it himself. If she was there, then she knew and Ned took her because she knew and didn't want tro bring anyone else in on it. We do not know enough about Wylla for you to say he can't trust her.

Catelyn has not proved she can be trusted just because she is Ned's wife and loves her own children. All mothers love their children, and most love their husbands. You still have not given me a logical answer to the fact that telling more people gives greater risk to the secret coming out.

There are many reason why Ned may not have told Catelyn, but we did not start the serries when Ned came back from war, so we do not know them. To say because she is his wife, she should trust him with the life of Jon is just wrong. She proved to Ned again and again that she dislikes the boy, and well telling her could warm her heart, there is no proof it would. Everyone else would still think Jon is Ned's bastard, and that might not sit well with her. Or maybe Ned wanted to see how she would treat Jon, if she treated him like a son he would tell her, if not, then he woulkd no tell her. Point is you can't say because they were married that Ned has to trust her with the biggest secret of his life.

There is also the fact that we do not know what Lyanna asked Ned to promise. Could be she asked him to raise him as his own son, and never tell anyone the truth. We just don't know yet, and therefore you can't say there is a reason for Ned to trust her.

You are missing the point. If you are going up against three members of the Kingsguard (or any guarded area), it would make more sense to carry overwhelming numbers. Seven against three aren't great odds. So it explains that Ned understood that what he might find at the ToJ would be something he'd want to keep secret. So every person there was someone he was comfortable with knowing about Lyanna's child. This is evidence against the number crunch arguement ("taking any additional person into a conspiracy is a bad risk") when he had no trouble having five other people involved. Ned probably would have taken twenty men if he could trust each one.

This does not work. First Ned is shocked to find the KG at the ToJ, he did not know they would be there. Second we do not know how Ned learned Lyanna was at the ToJ. It is likely that someone gave him a note, or told him where to go, and only to take those he trusted with his life. he went to war with these men, and they fought beside him. He did not know what he was going to find there, but knew he should bring people he had trust in. The fact that 6 of his close friends died is another reason why he might not want to tell anyone.

We do not know enough about why Ned went to the ToJ, but it is unlikely he would know he was going to find a baby that was Targaryen. It is one thing to be told to bring people you trust, without knowing why, and another to bring people into something you already know.

You're logic about sending him to the wall agrees with my position. Eddard doesn't want him to go to the wall, but he sees there's no choice. Why is there no choice? Because Jon is not his nephew.

Sorry that doesn't make sense. Jon wants to go to the Wall, Ned can't bring him to King's Landing because he is a bastard, and Catelyn doesn't want him at Winterfell. Jon wants to go to the Wall and the only thing Ned thing Ned doesn't agree with is that he is young, if he was older he woulkd not have given a second thought about it. Jon is still a bastard in the eyes of the realm, just because he may be the hidden son of Lyanna does not change that. Jon still has to live his life as a bastard, no matter who his parents are, and the wall is a good place for him.

Your logic that because Ned thinks he is too young to go to the Wall, and therefore not the son of Lyanna is no logic at all.

Now this is just bad sophistry. Jon is perfectly safe at Winterfell and he deserves a home that's reflective of his roots. If Lyanna entrusted her child to Eddard, the last thing he should do is turn him over to the wall. I agree there is honor at the wall. There was honor in killing Mad Aerys, even if meant Jaime's death. But there is no honor with Ned for sending his nephew off for vows he doesn't understand. Even Benjen was against the idea of Jon joining the Nights' Watch.

Have you forgot that Catelyn said Jon was not welcomed to stay at Wintefell with her? She says he is no son of hers and therefore cannot stay. Ned is 14, he is young yes, but many people in Westeros start down their life path at 14. Jon's will be harder, but it is his life, and his choice. Also Jon will be kept with his unclke who Ned would know would treat him better then Catelyn.

This is bad reasoning. Jon is a symbol of infidelity. If Eddard told her how he was his nephew, this situation would clear up faster than a Stark can say "winter is coming."

Ned had no reason to trust Catelyn with the biggest secret of his life. Read what I said a on this issue up top.

And it's comment like this that get on my nerves.

Well that comment I made is true, you have yet to disprove it. Not even Wylla seems more likely with what we know. We try and explain with things we know, and right now with what we know, R+L=J fits.

[Sandsnake]

I don't like the idea that Arthur Dayne is Jon's father. There is no evidence or clues whatsoever that point to any kind of affair or confrontation between Arthur & Lyanna. And anyway, Dayne doesn't strike me as a knight who would break his vows.

And I don't like Jon being a Targ either. He's too cold to be one. I agree with all the points in post #1

[Steve Moss]

I don't like the idea that Arthur Dayne is Jon's father. There is no evidence or clues whatsoever that point to any kind of affair or confrontation between Arthur & Lyanna. And anyway, Dayne doesn't strike me as a knight who would break his vows.

And I don't like Jon being a Targ either. He's too cold to be one. I agree with all the points in post #1

Who is arguing that Arthur Dayne is Jon's father?

[SD Stark]

Who is arguing that Arthur Dayne is Jon's father?

Definately not me, I believe Jon's parents are Ned and Ashara. However, there was a thread where someone posted that Jon's parents were Arthur Dayne and Lyanna. I don't know if anyone's brought that up in this thread, but I remember reading that.

[Lord Stark]

Yes Arthur Dayne and Lyanna was brought up in this thread. I think the first post has links to Arthur Dayne and Lyanna Stark. I agree that there is nothing to hint at these two as a couple, and I find it hard to believe that a KG, who is SotM, and said to be one of the finest knights in the realm, would break his vows.

[Blackfish]

The Targ coloring does not make to much of a difference in any theory. If Jon did look a little like a Targ, Ned could just say ok, ok I did hook up with Ashara. Since Jon has a Stark look to him, Ned can dismiss the whole Ashara rumor that was started just in case. Also, no one ever claims that Edric Dayne is a Targ, even though he does have some what Targ looks. I have pondered the idea of him actually being baby Aegon a little bit, but when I think of what that would entail and the whole mechanics of it, I get a headache and tell myself I will think about it later.

[Ser Brendan the Voyager]

The Targ coloring does not make to much of a difference in any theory. If Jon did look a little like a Targ, Ned could just say ok, ok I did hook up with Ashara. Since Jon has a Stark look to him, Ned can dismiss the whole Ashara rumor that was started just in case. Also, no one ever claims that Edric Dayne is a Targ, even though he does have some what Targ looks. I have pondered the idea of him actually being baby Aegon a little bit, but when I think of what that would entail and the whole mechanics of it, I get a headache and tell myself I will think about it later.

Baby Aegon had blond hair as is said in the books. If you read through So SPake Martin however he says that the Targaryen appearance was just not a dominant feature. There were Targs who didn't have the silvery-blond hair or the violet eyes. And we havfe never seen a blend or a targ and a stark. who's to knwo which trait would be dominant and which would be submisive?

[Xanrn]

Well Art argues better than Lord Stark...

I have no problem with R+L=J, its what people starting spouting in relation to it..

Jon being the Bastard of Rhaeger+Lyanna, is fine.

Jon being a legitmate child of a marriage between the two is cliched, but can still work aslong as he ignores this and goes with the Rand Al'thor approach (ie Rand knows full well who his real parents are and they were married, but he still thinks of Tam as his father and so keeps his name, not Rand of the Whatever Sept of the Whatever Clan or Rand of his Mothers Andoran House)

It starts to get far to cliched cheese fanfic pure bullshit after that.

With all the bloody Jon will be the head of a Dragon, ride a Dragon, marry Dany, be King.. He will stay on the wall, ignoring the North which he knows, but asoon as the Unknown Aunt turns up, he sheds his black as fast possible.

:sick:

Whatever, if any of that shit happens the books are going in the bin (well the paperbacks anyway, hardbacks to a used bookshop).

Who made Jon doesn't really matter...

Jon who is who he is, the Son of Eddard Stark of Winterfell. If someone came upto and told you that your parents weren't your parents? Would you care? (if your parent/s were good like Eddard)... I wouldn't...

[Lord Stark]

Well I am a bastard and do not know my father, not even his name, and learning who he is will not change me as a person, but it will change the way I see things in life. I think you wouldn't care because you have had a good life with a good childhood. Well Jon was always treated well by Ned, he wasn't by Catelyn and was always remained he was a bastard. It's one thingto say you wouldn't care if you haven't lived it, but another to know what it's like to live life with the burden of being a bastard. One of the reason I like Jon so much is because he is a bastard, and changing that would take something away from him.

I think Jon staying on the Wall for the rest of his life would be a far more boring story then him aiding the North or Dany. I don't believe that he will throw his vows out, but I think eather he will be released from them, or the Night's Watch will be disbanded.

I can't understand why anyone would throw their books out because they don't like a little bit of what GRRM might do. If Jon were to stay on the Wall his whole life, I would feel a little sad that it happened, but hardly would I throw out the books. I read them for the story GRRM tells, and not what I want him to tell.

I'll agree I can't argue my points as good as some people, but I still think my points make sense.

I'm on the first book of Wheel of Time...

[Targ loyalist]

All Targaryens seem to have the similar pesona...they are a little bit arrogant,and most of all they have SOMETHING with dragons.Their blood is the dragons blood,and they are tied.But,put aside that,I said it so many times,do you really think that GRRm would put all the evidences in the first 3 books to figure out the main mystery!?I think R+L is a red herring...its just something he prepared for us,to think we are right,and then when he reveals the truth...just think about it,R+L is a red herring,a trap!He is giving us the clues,hoping the sheep will believe...and they are(no offense!).

[Lord Stark]

Well most Targaryen are raised around dragons, or the history of dragons. Jon was raised in Winterfell and so would not be the same as if he grew up in King's Landing as a Targaryen. Blood doesn't make the person, how they are raised does, but Jon was arrogant when he joined the Night's Watch. He thought he was the best sword in his group. Unless Jon grew up around dragons, he has no reason to think about them since he thinks he is a son of a Stark.

GRRM could have given us this as a red herring, but remember most people don't come to R+L=J until they come to this board. Some do, but very few. I never ever thought R+L=J until I came here. I think when GRRM was writing the books, he didn't plan on a site like this where hundreds of people could talk about his story.

So yes well I believe GRRM might have given us all he has to mislead us, until we read more and learn otherwise, I'm not going to start thinking up who his parents could be that we might not have met or have no reason to think.

[Darkostar]

Who made Jon doesn't really matter...

Jon who is who he is, the Son of Eddard Stark of Winterfell. If someone came upto and told you that your parents weren't your parents? Would you care? (if your parent/s were good like Eddard)... I wouldn't...

THANK YOU. I've been trying to say that for awhile now, but i couldn't put in such an eloquent way.

[Moosicus]

Jon decided to stay on the Wall instead of taking Stannis up on his offer to be lord of Winterfell, if someone told him he was the son of Rhaegar and Lyanna, though I'm sure he would be shocked, he would probably say "who gives a shit, I'm Lord Commander of the Nights watch, I don't have parents, only brothers."

[The Blueseer]

Despite all the evidences about Rhaegar and Lyanna,I think Jon is not their son.Yesterday I reread all Jon's POVs so far,and I never,but NEVER found anything that would be a Targ characteristic.

Cheers! Before even reading the thread I'm all for Targ loyalist 's opinion.

It really makes my day! (amongst others). Right! Snow! No dragon-eyes. Weirwood eyes!

A true son of the North.

R+L can finally rest their weary heads on cobweb-pillows.

So, cheers for Jon, Bastard in the North.

[Lord Stark]

Why do people think Jon would have to act like a Targaryen, and that all Targaryen act the same? There are many different Targaryen, and many act like kings and princes because they have been raised that way. If R+L=J, Jon was still raised in the North as a bastard son to Ned Stark. He would have no reason to act like a Targaryen, or have dreams of dragons, or think he was a dragon.

We know that GRRM has said that Targaryen genes are weak, most likely because of inbreeding, so there is no reason Jon would have to look Targaryen. Aren't most Targaryen born of parents outside the targaryen bloodline, look different then their blood who were born just from Targaryen blood?

I also don't think that Jon is going to learn who is parents, and then say, "fuck this I'm a Targaryen, I'm out of here". He will do his duty, but I think the NW will be disbanded or destroyed, leaving Jon free of his oath.

Jon was offered Winterfell by a man who had no right to give it too him, and he knows he is not a Stark, so he wouldn't take Winterfell. At least I doubt he will ever take Winterfell.

[The Blueseer]

Why do people think Jon would have to act like a Targaryen, and that all Targaryen act the same? There are many different Targaryen, and many act like kings and princes because they have been raised that way. If R+L=J, Jon was still raised in the North as a bastard son to Ned Stark. He would have no reason to act like a Targaryen, or have dreams of dragons, or think he was a dragon.

But why do so many people on this board even want Jon to be a Targaryen?I think Dany is a whole big a lot almost to much of a Targaryen. + her three Dragons. I'm really glad there is only one. I like her chapters most of the time, but one suits just fine.

You can build up so many speculations. Dragons against or with direwolves . The cream against (or with) Snow. The black one with Shaggydog , Mmm.. The green one with...

Summer, who should have greenished a bit of course when the time comes.

But why can't Jon just be a Stark? And nothing but a Stark?.

[Blue Steel]

I'm pretty convinced R+L=J. In fact, if Jon does not end up the son of Rhaegar and Lyanna, I would be very disapointed and entirely convinced that Martin changed his story in response to the online community.

The blue rose on the wall in Dany's vision pretty much sealed it for me. But aside from that, the preponderance of evidence pretty much backs up the R+L=J theory. There's just too much to overcome.

[Artanaro]

Just to make a comment, I brought up the Arthur + Lyanna = Jon debate, because stevem mentioned A+L=J. In his context, he was referring to Aerys, not Arthur. There was a past theory that considered Arthur and Lyanna, so I assumed this was the one he referenced. This was my mistake, but when I get some motivation, I'll go comment on Aerys and Lyanna .

Artanaro

[Lord Stark]

Well from what we know I think he is the son a Targaryen, not because I want him to be, but because of what we know so far. If he was the bastard son of Ned I would be alright with that. I think that just because he might have Targaryen blood in him, doesn't mean he isn't a Stark. He is a Stark on one side of his family because he has the Stark look. Learning that his father might be a Targaryen would not change him. Jon was raised a Stark and that will not change with him knowing who his parents are. Whatever GRRM does will be fine with me.

[Xanrn]

Another thing about the whole Dragon Blood/Wolf Blood.

Their not the same thing.

Dragon Blood is Aeron Brightflame attacking Tansy Too-Tall and then backing off when Dunk comes and ordering his men in.

Its Viserys abusing Dany and trying to order his "man" to beat her..

Its about striking only if your in a stronger position against a weaker opponent.

The Wolf Blood, is Brandon riding up to the Red Keep demanding Rhaeger comes out and dies.

Ned attacking Littlefinger when he gets pushed to far.

Jon attacks Thorne and others.

This is about not caring about positions, just go for the throat.

Dragon blood is about power and control, like a Rapist.

Wolf Blood is about losing yourself to the Barezerk Rage.

I will throw the books out when they become contrived shite, like Goodkind and Brooks.

My Idea of contrived shit, is Jon getting a Dragon, Marrying Dany, becoming King.