R + L = J Part XXIII

[LadyMary]

Yes I did read your post. You said,

No, not all Targaryens are immune to fire or heat all the time. Otherwise Viserys wouldn't have been killed instantly by the molten gold. Here's the Citadel page that confirms it.

I read your post and disagree with it. Your point is that you think R+L=J because even though he has no dragon traits, he is still Rhaegars son because lots of other Targs don't have dragon traits.

I disagree with your points.

Mormant,

Please correct me if I have the wrong impression, but when you say “I disagree with your points” I interpret that to mean “I disagree with your points…because I don’t want to believe the theory of R+L=J”. Is that the correct interpretation?

In any case, (just speaking for myself here) it’s perfectly fine to disagree, to not be convinced by the evidence or to not believe a theory for whatever reason. There are some people who have honestly stated that they don’t like the idea that R+L=J and don’t want it to be true, whether they find the evidence to be persuasive or not. That’s fine too. But I can’t help being curious about how adamantly you try to “disprove” this theory, including setting up Strawman arguments and then disagreeing with the rebuttals of those original fallacies.

From what I’ve seen posted, I don’t think anybody here has a problem with disagreements about what Jon’s R+L parentage may mean for his Hero’s journey, or his survival or the future of his world.

As an example, I do think R+L=J but I’m not convinced, as some here are, that will mean Jon is a true-born son of Rhaegar, or that he has a claim on the Iron Throne or even Winterfell, or that he’s the Prince That Was Promised/Azor Ahai (I think Dany is the PTWP/AA). I think people knowing the truth about Jon’s (R+L) parentage may actually endanger Jon more than anything else and further complicate his life. As a fan who is invested in Jon's story, I personally hope he gets to have a better existence than spending it stuck in a cold, miserable place like the Wall for the rest of his life, but that doesn’t mean he ever will get to leave the Nights Watch to do something else with his life or even survive to see the Spring.

Anyway, I just feel like debate about fan theories is all good when we all don’t know what GRRM plans. I do think that when something is explicitly “canon” or what the author has actually said, it’s not really subject to debate. We may all be wrong about our respective theories and will have a good laugh about it later. I just feel like this debate shouldn’t be a “war” with the sides armed with verbal pitchforks and torches – lol.

Just my 2 cents...

[SerArthurHeath]

Yeah, if Jon is Rhaegar's blood and Mel finds out, bad stuff is going to happen on the wall- I wonder if the NW will allow the sacrifice of their LC to a pagan god and if they can stop it...

[Wik]

Yeah, if Jon is Rhaegar's blood and Mel finds out, bad stuff is going to happen on the wall- I wonder if the NW will allow the sacrifice of their LC to a pagan god and if they can stop it...

There has already been some debate that the exact opposite would happen. Mel, in many's eyes, is warning (no pun intended) to Jon Snow. If R+L=J is true and she discovers this, she may well abandon Stannis and claim that Jon is AA, creating a really big shit storm between Stannis and Jon but not the pagan sacrifice issue you brought up lol. So many possibilities!

[Jon Blackfyre]

Dont forget the King, who died drinking wildfire

Just wanted to clarify this, it wasnt a king, it was Aeron Brightflame, one of Egg's older brothers that did this. He was a prince at the time.

[Peasant with No Story Arc]

I'm (years) late to this. I started reading the books after the HBO series began and though I'd seen it claimed on one board before starting AGoT that Jon wasn't Ned's son (and said in such a way that it sounded like it'd already been revealed, which it hasn't) from the Tower of Joy flashback on I've believed R + L = J. Mostly because, and these are my questions to those who don't believe it, if R + L does not = J, what did Lyanna make Ned promise her? What story purpose did the flashback serve, if it wasn't a hint that R + L = J? Why put off revealing the identity of Jon's mother for over four books if it wasn't Lyanna?

Any argument that R + L does not = J seems to me like it's a reaction against how obvious it is. Give people years to speculate and they'll talk themselves into anything for entertainment. I've been lurking for a few weeks on this board and rare is the day I don't see a "_____ isn't dead" topic, even if a POV character watched the person die. Who's a more likely candidate to have been Jon's mother? How would it be better for the story if it was anyone other than Lyanna?

[Peasant with No Story Arc]

Sorry for the double post.

[Kaitscralt]

The thing, it's not even that obvious. Your average, dedicated reader will admit that they didn't catch it until coming to Westeros or another website. It just seems obvious to us because we've been running circles around it for a decade while waiting for another book.

[SerArthurHeath]

Just wanted to clarify this, it wasnt a king, it was Aeron Brightflame, one of Egg's older brothers that did this. He was a prince at the time.

Sorry. The point still stands though

[Wik]

The thing, it's not even that obvious. Your average, dedicated reader will admit that they didn't catch it until coming to Westeros or another website. It just seems obvious to us because we've been running circles around it for a decade while waiting for another book.

Ya, I had read the series 4 times (just AGot through ASoS at that point) before I REALLY figured it out. Each time I put more and more together. I learned of it, pieced it together for myself and was texting friends and going nuts when I finally put a majority of the clues together. I randomly started looking for forums for the series to share my new found theory with, only to stumble upon these forums where a raging debate for R+L =J was raging. I was so sad that others new but so excited that others had also discovered what I had found.

Point is though, it took me four re-reads and several days of combing back over those select chapters and sections, honing the theory until it clicked and fell into place...So, ya it isn't that obvious. It is now, if you frequent this, or similar sites. But readers who are isolated from us might not know it.

I also maintain that many of us who found it out on our own have a stronger belief in it. Some people get pissy when an idea or clue isn't discovered by them and so dismiss it. I think finding it on your own helps to galvanize that theory or idea, rather than it being "forced" on you by others. This isn't true in all cases, obviously, but because I found it myself, I am much more of a staunch support of the theory.

[Silverin]

The thing, it's not even that obvious. Your average, dedicated reader will admit that they didn't catch it until coming to Westeros or another website. It just seems obvious to us because we've been running circles around it for a decade while waiting for another book.

Agree.

I actually thought about it from the first time I read the AGoT (though at that time I still thought if Lyanna had a son it was the product of rape).

But for example my brother who is supposed to be way smarter than me, didnt catch anything at all that points into this direction. I pointed out to him, so if he didnt notice I too think as well it is not that obvious either.

That is why compeletly dissing any other ideas, like Jon is actually Ned's son, seems a little bit too much.

Granted a lot of sign seems to point in to the R+L=J direction, but a lot of times it is about interpretations. Some people want it to be true so much that the very idea that some of theese could mean something else counts heretic.

[morbiczer]

Sorry. The point still stands though

I used to point out Aerion's wildfire drinking as one piece of evidence that Targs are not immune to fire, but a couple of weeks ago someone corrected me, and I have to agree with him. Wildfire =/= fire, and so this incident is irrelevant for thsi issue.

Wildfire is a liquid, and unless I have forgotten this detail, it was never mentioned that Aerion drank burning wildfire. So all we now is that wildfire is poisonous, ar acidic, or something and it kills people when it is drunk.

[Ser Pistus]

(...) evidence that Targs are not immune to fire(...)

Do we really need evidence for that? The word of GRRM is enough for me.

[morbiczer]

Do we really need evidence for that? The word of GRRM is enough for me.

No we don't need evidence. But people bring it up from time to time, and it is better to say "They are not immune, here is the proof from the books." than "They are not fireproof, this one guy on the internet claims that GRRM once said so."

And to be honest, the TV show very strongly implies that Dany at least is fireproof (she doesn't get burned whenshe takes the eggs out of the fire, but her handmaid's hands get burned), so expect a lot of people to think this in the future too.

[hart]

(Hello, first post.)

I think that some of the best evidence for R+L=J can be found in the HBO series, partly because it's such a clear distillation of the first book, and because Sean Bean has basically said "this is the motivation for Ned when talking with Jon" - read here for details: http://nymag.com/daily/entertainment/2011/06/sean_bean_on_whats_next_for_ga.html

In Episode 2, when Jon leaves for the Wall with Benjen, and Ned is leaving for KL, Ned says to Jon "You may not have my name, but you have my blood." This is a roundabout way of affirming a close kinship without actually saying he is his father.

There's also evidence for why Ned would keep Jon's true parentage so secret (if it really is R+L) is in Robert's intense and irrational desire to kill all the Targ's, everywhere - portrayed pretty strongly in the TV series as well.

I'm only just beginning my second read-through of the books in anticipation for ADWD (wish me luck, hey?), and in Catelyn's second chapter it's pretty clear that Ned avoids lying directly to Catelyn about Jon: "He is of my blood, and that is all you need to know." Of course, the other interpretation is that this is just a turn of phrase, but I think that George's wording here is very deliberate.

Regarding the Targ's supposed immunity to being burned: the TV series (much like the books) sets up Dany as being unique in this aspect during Viserys' execution scene. "Fire can't kill a dragon."

[Ser Pistus]

"Fire can't kill a dragon" is actually very interesting. Many people think that this means that Targaryens are immune to fire, but actually it means exactly the opposite. It means "See, Viserys bro, you are not a dragon. You are just a man. And a man who thinks he is a dragon is a madman."

Interestingly, there is a very similar dialogue between Tyrion and his host in the Dance preview chapter (on GRRM's homepage).

Really guys: I know there's not long to go, but NO SPOILERS, however small. OK? - m

[The White Wolf]

The thing, it's not even that obvious. Your average, dedicated reader will admit that they didn't catch it until coming to Westeros or another website. It just seems obvious to us because we've been running circles around it for a decade while waiting for another book.

So true. Until I came to this web-site, the thought had not even popped into my head. Though I only have read each of the books once so far (started after watching the first few episodes of GoT on HBO). So I'm still very new to the series :)

[B4cchus]

Hi guys, first post. I've read the original thread of this epic and skimmed some of the rest -- alas the size makes it impossible to read fully, and I never saw one question adressed:

Whenever GRRM talks about Jon's hair, IIRC, he says it is "dark". The same is given in asoiaf wiki, and of course on the show Jon's hair is jet black. Now, the typical Stark colouring is brown, for example Arya's hair is always described as "brown" and on the show it is brown too, and we are told that Arya has a strong Lyanna look. We know how important colouring is to the series, and that on the show Jon's parentage is meant to be made "more obvious" -- the use of "dark" in the text, and the direct presentation of Jon's hair as black on the show seems to fit the bill. Now, to me, this throws a spanner in the works for Rhaegar and Lyanna, as white and brown cannot make black whichever way you look at it. If this was previously adressed, could you please point me to the relevant post/text excerpt.

Secondly, the bulk of the evidence for Lyanna and Rhaegar, as I read it, is actually evidence for Lyanna alone -- Ned's description of Jon as his blood, rather than son, the blue rose vision, etc. Could somebody provide a summary for evidence that specifically Rhaegar, and not any other man is the father? The only evidence that I got so far, is that Rhaegar is prophecy-obsessed and wanted another child. I could buy into that, I guess, but I see no reason why Rhaegar would want Lyanna specifically to be the mother, and even if he chose Lyanna, why should he abduct her?

Here's what jars with me: the war was started, as far as we know, because of Lyanna's abduction and the immediate reaction the abduction caused. Rhaegar is not a moron, he knew people would look for Lyanna, he could easily guess that after crowning her QoLaB, he would be under suspicion and that Lyanna's relatives would come to Aerys to demand justice. Again, Rhaegar is not a moron, he must have known that whatever Aerys's reactions to demands for justice against his own family would have been, they were near-certain to be exceedingly agressive and/or insulting. Moreover, should the child have been born and war avoided, what life was in store for him? Viserys would have wanted him dead. Martells would have wanted him dead. Starks would have been offended and probably want at least Rhaegar dead. All the other people would not have cared for this child one bit, which means that they would have been eager to serve any of the above in killing him. Finally, we know that Rhaegar had plans to unseat Aerys -- why not do that first, what exactly made Lyanna so special that all his plans, and indeed the Seven Kingdoms themselves, had to be gambled, simply to have her as the mother right now?

Now, I guess criticising the Rhaegar theory would be pointless, if there was no alternative, but as it happens, Westeros does not lack black-haired prickly sods, who are known to travel everywhere, take part in tourneys and stick their cocks into everything that moves. Which makes me wonder exactly what was Oberyn Martell doing just before the war? Wouldn't he see fucking Lyanna as just the way to payback Rhaegar for the QoLaB crowning? And why did Lyanna end up in Dorne, of all places?

[iamthedave]

No we don't need evidence. But people bring it up from time to time, and it is better to say "They are not immune, here is the proof from the books." than "They are not fireproof, this one guy on the internet claims that GRRM once said so."

And to be honest, the TV show very strongly implies that Dany at least is fireproof (she doesn't get burned whenshe takes the eggs out of the fire, but her handmaid's hands get burned), so expect a lot of people to think this in the future too.

It's fortunate she also appears to be smoke inhalation-proof, too :D

[Dragonfish]

No we don't need evidence. But people bring it up from time to time, and it is better to say "They are not immune, here is the proof from the books." than "They are not fireproof, this one guy on the internet claims that GRRM once said so."

It's not "one guy on the internet" claiming GRRM said so, it's from the mouth of GRRM himself.

And I'm sorry, but we have no reason to suspect the wildfire did not catch on fire when Aerion drank it. For one thing, wildfire is very volatile. For another, the entire reason that Aerion drank the wilfire was to become a dragon, suggesting that he expected it to catch fire. Suggesting that a substance called "wildfire" killed him in any way other than burning him is really stretching things, IMO.

[Dragonfish]

Hi guys, first post.

Welcome to the board, B4cchus.

Whenever GRRM talks about Jon's hair, IIRC, he says it is "dark". The same is given in asoiaf wiki, and of course on the show Jon's hair is jet black. Now, the typical Stark colouring is brown, for example Arya's hair is always described as "brown" and on the show it is brown too, and we are told that Arya has a strong Lyanna look. We know how important colouring is to the series, and that on the show Jon's parentage is meant to be made "more obvious" -- the use of "dark" in the text, and the direct presentation of Jon's hair as black on the show seems to fit the bill. Now, to me, this throws a spanner in the works for Rhaegar and Lyanna, as white and brown cannot make black whichever way you look at it. If this was previously adressed, could you please point me to the relevant post/text excerpt.

First of all, the show is not canon. The fact that Jon Snow has black hair is not evidence of Jon's hair color in the books.

Second of all, we can surmise that Jon has dark brown hair, because Ned and Arya do, and they are both described as looking like Jon (and vice versa). Incidentally, the fact that Jon is compared to Arya, and Arya to Lyanna, means that Jon is indirectly compared to Lyanna. So if you accept that Lyanna is probably the mother, then Jon most likely gets his hair color from her.

That said, even if Jon's hair were black, he still could have gotten that from Rhaegar, who has Martell ancestors.

Secondly, the bulk of the evidence for Lyanna and Rhaegar, as I read it, is actually evidence for Lyanna alone -- Ned's description of Jon as his blood, rather than son, the blue rose vision, etc. Could somebody provide a summary for evidence that specifically Rhaegar, and not any other man is the father? The only evidence that I got so far, is that Rhaegar is prophecy-obsessed and wanted another child. I could buy into that, I guess, but I see no reason why Rhaegar would want Lyanna specifically to be the mother, and even if he chose Lyanna, why should he abduct her?

We don't really know why Rhaegar chose Lyanna, but we do know that if he wanted a third child, then he had to choose someone. Perhaps he merely chose a person he was in love with? Also, it's entirely possible that Rhaegar didn't abduct Lyanna, but that she went willingly with him. But that's a subject for another thread.

As to your larger point in this paragraph, the reason most people think it was Rhaegar (aside from the things you mention, like his concern with the prophecy) is that the timeline doesn't really work out for anyone else. Jon was born around the Sack of King's Landing, meaning he had to have been conceived a few months into the year-long war. As far as we know, Rhaegar was the only person in a position to conceive Jon with Lyanna during this time.

Here's what jars with me: the war was started, as far as we know, because of Lyanna's abduction and the immediate reaction the abduction caused. Rhaegar is not a moron, he knew people would look for Lyanna, he could easily guess that after crowning her QoLaB, he would be under suspicion and that Lyanna's relatives would come to Aerys to demand justice. Again, Rhaegar is not a moron, he must have known that whatever Aerys's reactions to demands for justice against his own family would have been, they were near-certain to be exceedingly agressive and/or insulting. Moreover, should the child have been born and war avoided, what life was in store for him? Viserys would have wanted him dead. Martells would have wanted him dead. Starks would have been offended and probably want at least Rhaegar dead. All the other people would not have cared for this child one bit, which means that they would have been eager to serve any of the above in killing him. Finally, we know that Rhaegar had plans to unseat Aerys -- why not do that first, what exactly made Lyanna so special that all his plans, and indeed the Seven Kingdoms themselves, had to be gambled, simply to have her as the mother right now?

I think you exaggerate things a bit here. I don't see why Viserys or the Martells would have wanted Jon dead. The war began because Brandon did something stupid, something Rhaegar and Lyanna most likely did not predict. I don't know why Rhaegar felt he needed to abscond with Lyanna right then, as we don't really have all the details surrounding that event. However, he may simply have decided that the new War for the Dawn was near, and that all other affairs of the realm were subordinate to his need to make a third head of the dragon. In other words, the prophecy may have blinded him to the dangers.

Now, I guess criticising the Rhaegar theory would be pointless, if there was no alternative, but as it happens, Westeros does not lack black-haired prickly sods, who are known to travel everywhere, take part in tourneys and stick their cocks into everything that moves. Which makes me wonder exactly what was Oberyn Martell doing just before the war? Wouldn't he see fucking Lyanna as just the way to payback Rhaegar for the QoLaB crowning? And why did Lyanna end up in Dorne, of all places?

Now this is interesting, I thought you were headed for a "Robert is the father" theory. Anyway, Lyanna was in the Dornish marches because that's where Rhaegar took her. And we really have no reason to suspect that Oberyn was anywhere near the Tower of Joy, especially since its location appears to have been a secret, even to the king.