R + L = J Part XXIII

[Dragonfish]

I see we're going to start arguing semantics here, but here goes. If we are not supposed to imply that Jon is Ned's son, why is the distinction made for "children of her body?" If the rationale is as simple as you state, the distinction about the children being of her body would be unnecessary. Your interpretation of the statement would be served by stating, "What would Catelyn do if it were Jon's life against the lives of her children?"

I'm honestly at a loss for why the whole "children of her body" thing implies that Jon is Ned's son. It seems to me that "children of her body" could mean two things: 1. the children who came from her womb, or 2. her biological children in general. If it means the former, then the phrase "children of her body" can really only apply to Catelyn, and thus has no application to Ned and Jon. If it means the latter, then it could also apply to Jon and Ned; in other words, Ned could refer to Jon as a "child of his body," given this meaning. However, Ned never does say or imply that Jon is a child of his body. He never once asks himself what he would do if he had to choose between Jon's life and the life of another child. That is rather telling, IMO.

As for why Ned uses the phrase in the first place, I always assumed it was just for emphasis, as I see no other purpose for it in the sentence.

EDIT--Nevermind, wallofice hits on a perfectly good explanation. Jon is in a sense Catelyn's son, or at least her foster son. So if Ned said to himself "what if Catelyn had to choose between Jon's life and the lives of her children," that would probably seem a bit...imprecise, in his mind at least. By saying, "what if Catelyn had to choose between Jon's life and the lives of the children of her body," he's distinguishing between Catelyn's biological children and her foster child.

On a side note, it would sound a lot better if there was an "I believe" before your assertion that I'm incorrect. If it was Martin telling me that, I'd be inclined to listen, but coming from another poster who is also interpreting another person's written words, it tends to come off as condescending and arrogant. I haven't gotten that impression from you in the past, so I'm hopeful that wasn't your intent. I know this is a thread where probably over 90% of the posters agree with you, but that still seems like bad form. JMHO.

The whole "Incorrect" thing was meant to be succinct and attention-grabbing. Also, I honestly believed you were incorrect. You were making a claim that the grammatical structure of the sentence implied that Ned thinks of Jon as his son. I believed that was incorrect, and you have yet to challenge my argument on that front. If the way I expressed myself came across as condescending or arrogant, then I apologize.

[History of Westeros]

Ned also refer's to Bran and Robb as "the boy." Is that also telling?

What a strange thing to say. Do you really think that my point was that because "this one time, he refers to him as 'the boy' that must mean he's not his own child?" He NEVER thinks of Jon as his son.. not once. That's the point.

[Jeejee]

Something struck me as I've been re-reading the books in anticipation of DwD...in ACoK Dany sees the following vision in the House of the Undying.

"He has a song," the man replied. "He is the prince that was promised, and his is the song of ice and fire." He looked up when he said it and his eyes met Dany's, and it seemed as if he saw her standing there beyond the door. "There must be one more," he said, though whether he was speaking to her or the woman in the bed she could not say. "The dragon has three heads."

From this passage a few things are clear:

1. Rhaegar believes his son Aegon is the PtwP and/or Azor Ahai

2. He believes Aegon needs another sister, to fulfill the three heads of the dragon.

3. Rhaegar will ensure there is a third head. ("There must be one more.")

We've heard a couple of characters say that Elia was sickly/wasn't in great health. Perhaps she was unable to have a third child, which would explain Rhaegar's attraction to Lyanna - he needed a second wife, one who would give him the third head of the dragon. If this is the case, it's also an argument for Jon being a legitimate heir, not a bastard.

And apologies if this point has been made before...which, considering this is thread XXIII, I'm suddenly sure it has been. But I just put together Elia's fragile health + the difficulties of pregnancy = third head of the dragon unlikely to come from her.

[hart]

Jon being a legitimate heir, not a bastard.

On a more technical point, would there be any precedent for more than one wife in Westeros? I'm fairly sure that it's been covered elsewhere that there's no divorce, and the only way to dissolve a marriage is to have the High Septon annul it.

There must be a detail I'm missing in one of the books, because I've seen this brought up many times. I know that bastards can be legitimised, e.g. Bloodraven and all that, but doesn't that require the King or the father of said children to be alive?

[Dragonfish]

On a more technical point, would there be any precedent for more than one wife in Westeros? I'm fairly sure that it's been covered elsewhere that there's no divorce, and the only way to dissolve a marriage is to have the High Septon annul it.

There is precedent for Targaryens having more than one wife, yes.

[Jeejee]

There is precedent for Targaryens having more than one wife, yes.

That's what I believe would have happened. Rhaegar may even have married Lyanna with Elia's permission. We have no way of knowing what she thought of it, but he seemed to be keeping her in the loop about the PtwP, and if she was unable to have a third child she could have given him her blessing to take another wife.

[wallofice]

That's actually possible, as awkward as it would be. In Dany's vision, she says she can't tell if Rhaegar is speaking to the woman in it or to herself, so maybe he literally was telling Elia that he needed a third kid and thus a second wife. :blushing:

[Flit]

I always thought they would be married, but the fact that Elia would consent... Depends if she knew/believed what her husband possibly believed. I would be surprised if she was, she comes from a very proud family, and we've seen how Cersei and Catelyn reacted to such a betrayl. (Of course, I know Ned didn't whore around, I mean how Catelyn reacted towards Jon his whole life.)

A prediction for the next novel is we might actually have an answer to this question. Melisandre is looking for a child of king's blood to sacrifice, which is why Jon sent away Mance's child. But Jon is still very much in her grasp. If he really is the son of R & L, I just get the feeling that might be coming out.

Or I could be hoping for too much. The answer to this question probably won't come along until the very last book.

[simlei]

Hi,

After finishing the fourth book, there are many questions, and many more raised since visiting these boards :D So hi, thanks for putting all these out-of-thin-air-dragons-beneath-Winterfell-and-so-forth-conspiracy-theories in my head.

However, this formula, R+L = J makes sense, or not? I did only read the books once, so I may have sled over something. Is there even the slightest direct hint to Jon being NOT the son of Ned (but Lyanna)? Of course, it would be just too easy and uninteresting not having stuck one ore more secrets up Jons nebulous descent.

Also, the promise, if I recall correctly: The content of this promise was never compromised even remotely, or was it? After all, a great bunch of little puzzles would be solved with Jon being the bastard son of Rhaegar, hm? One example from the top of the stack: Neds determination not to talk about Jons mother.

Of course, you already wrote and read much of this. And I, too, read a lot of posts here, but could one do me the kindness as "welcome present" if you will to show me if I had anything wrong or missing in the above, or more pieces of the puzzle that I did not see at all (or overread). Couldn't be much more than a concise bullet list of 8 or 9 arguments, or I simply have no idea how much details (and I hope much red herring too) GRRM has hidden in these books.

Anyway, thanks =)

[Songstress]

Hi,

After finishing the fourth book, there are many questions, and many more raised since visiting these boards :D So hi, thanks for putting all these out-of-thin-air-dragons-beneath-Winterfell-and-so-forth-conspiracy-theories in my head.

However, this formula, R+L = J makes sense, or not? I did only read the books once, so I may have sled over something. Is there even the slightest direct hint to Jon being NOT the son of Ned (but Lyanna)? Of course, it would be just too easy and uninteresting not having stuck one ore more secrets up Jons nebulous descent.

Also, the promise, if I recall correctly: The content of this promise was never compromised even remotely, or was it? After all, a great bunch of little puzzles would be solved with Jon being the bastard son of Rhaegar, hm? One example from the top of the stack: Neds determination not to talk about Jons mother.

Of course, you already wrote and read much of this. And I, too, read a lot of posts here, but could one do me the kindness as "welcome present" if you will to show me if I had anything wrong or missing in the above, or more pieces of the puzzle that I did not see at all (or overread). Couldn't be much more than a concise bullet list of 8 or 9 arguments, or I simply have no idea how much details (and I hope much red herring too) GRRM has hidden in these books.

Anyway, thanks =)

Best place to go for the R+L=J "primer" is the Tower of the Hand essay, complete with book quotes:

http://towerofthehand.com/essays/chrisholden/jon_snows_parents.html

Once you've read that, you've got the basics, from which you can form your own favorite interpretation. :)

[L*eau]

Hi, there.

Regarding the R+L=J-theory, I haven't made up my mind yet. I don't like it, but there are several good arguments to prove them right.

I hope that didn't come up earlier (if so, forgive me, I really tried to get an overview of the posts in this thread, but it's nearly impossible):

If Jon is Lyannas son and Ned knows the importance of that fact, why would he send him so willingly to the wall? This isn't the way to protect the child of his sister against harm.

If Jon is his own son, Ned sure is worried, but he would more likely understand Jon's reasons and let him leave Winterfell, where Jon never had the feeling of being really welcomed.

Anyway, I'm looking forward to the next book and hope we get a little more clues.

[SFDanny]

If Jon is Lyannas son and Ned knows the importance of that fact, why would he send him so willingly to the wall? This isn't the way to protect the child of his sister against harm.

Hi, and welcome to the boards.

A couple of things. The context of the time in which Jon goes to the Wall is one of relative peace there (at least Ned believes so.) He has every reason to believe Jon will be safe there, and he has Benjen to look after him. The "importance" of Jon joining the Night's Watch is only apparent if one believes he is Lyanna's and Rhaegar's legitimate son (i.e. the rightful heir to the Targaryen throne.) We don't know, however, even if this is true, that Ned knows that this is the case. We would have to presume he learns Rhaegar and Lyanna were wed from a dying Lyanna (she may well have had more important things to impart to her brother in her fevered dying state than "oh, Ned, you should have seen the wedding!") OR he learns it from another of the survivors at the Tower of Joy that we don't yet know. Either way, if Ned knows, he may well think Jon's survival in a realm solidly in Robert's anti-Targaryen hand at the moment is more important than any fanciful future claim to a restored Targaryen throne.

[Lady of Casterly Rock]

Hi. Ned was shocked when he heared from Maester Luwin, that Jon wanted to join the Night`s Watch (paperback edition page 66). On page 67 it says: “Still, his voice was troubled. Jon is so young. If he asked this when he was a man grown, that would be one thing, but a boy of fourteen.”

I think Ned planned to tell Jon, who his real parents are. Perhaps he indented to tell him after Jon turned 16. I think – even if Jon is the trueborn son of Lyanna and Rhaegar - Ned would never supported his claim of the throne. Ned is one of the most honorable men in the books. Robert is his friend and Ned helped him win the throne. But I think Ned wanted to give Jon the possibility to swear that he would hold no lands and wear no crowns, knowing what it means for him. The circumstances made him allow Jon to take the black very young and not knowing who he is, because he could not leave him in Winterfell with Catelyn. In Jon had made the decision to take the black a few years later, Ned would supported him.

[Jon's No]

hello, i have convinced myself that R+L=J because its what i want to happen. i dont want it to be be true so that jon becomes the king and everyone lives happily ever after i want it to happen because the possibilities are endless story wise. i have been reading this thread for a few days now and im actually trying to find something to convince me that R+L=J is wrong but i dont see it. the only thing that has worried me is someone posted that aerys raped lyanna and rhaegar had been protecting her, i really hope this is wrong but as far as im concerned it could be possible. can anyone reassure me that this scenario is not possible? sorry about my typing by the way.

[Lady of Casterly Rock]

@ Jon´s No: We simple don´t know who war Jons parent at the moment. I really hope R+L=J profes true. I think, if Aerys was Jons father the story of the Knight of the Laughing Tree and the Story and the story of Bael's song would just be stories with no special meaning. If Rhaegar and Lyanna fall in Love in Herrenhall the story of the Knight of the Laughing Tree would tell us, when Rhaegar first noticed Lyanna. Bael´s song connects the “kidnapping” of a Winterfell Lady with blue roses. I thing George R. R. Martin´s writing is so great, that this stories have to have a secret meaning. This is an argument for Rhaegar and nont Aerys as Jons father.

[Aegon's Landing]

I always thought they would be married, but the fact that Elia would consent... Depends if she knew/believed what her husband possibly believed. I would be surprised if she was, she comes from a very proud family, and we've seen how Cersei and Catelyn reacted to such a betrayl. (Of course, I know Ned didn't whore around, I mean how Catelyn reacted towards Jon his whole life.)

A prediction for the next novel is we might actually have an answer to this question. Melisandre is looking for a child of king's blood to sacrifice, which is why Jon sent away Mance's child. But Jon is still very much in her grasp. If he really is the son of R & L, I just get the feeling that might be coming out.

Or I could be hoping for too much. The answer to this question probably won't come along until the very last book.

I think Jon is in deep doodoo with Stannis and Mel at the wall, because of his King's blood.

He has it either way, you see. If he's Rhaegar's, it's Targ blood. If he's Ned's (or Lyanna's) it's Stark blood, of the line of the "Kings in the North"

The fact that his brother Robb was a King doesn't help his situation either. My boy's double-screwed on the blood of kings thing.

@Jons No: Sorry, however far fetched A+L=J sounds, it is certainly NOT out of the realm of possibility. No evidence to prove it impossible at this time....I suspect July 12 will come and go with very little further info to prove/ disprove anything...except maybe a big fat red herring that may have been/was part of the reason GRRM had to scrap "Dragons" and pretty much start over years ago.

[Dragonfish]

the only thing that has worried me is someone posted that aerys raped lyanna and rhaegar had been protecting her, i really hope this is wrong but as far as im concerned it could be possible. can anyone reassure me that this scenario is not possible? sorry about my typing by the way.

Jon was conceived a few months into the war. From what we know so far, it's very unlikely that Lyanna was in the Red Keep at that time for Aerys to impregnate her. It's not completely impossible, I suppose, but it would be a very contrived scenario.

[Agon Khan]

I think I believe it, though it makes me wonder two things.

1. How Jon ended up with a Direwolf if he wasn't a son of Eddard Stark.

2. How Jon burned his hand when he saved Lord Commander Mormont.

The other factors seem to add up pretty well. I'm interested to see how GRRM resolves this mystery.

[Aegon's Landing]

On a separate note...

I see that many R+J supporters seem to believe that Rhaegar's image in Dani's Funhouse tour was saying he NEEDS TO MAKE another child, that HE NEEDS TO MAKE the dragon have three heads. I read it very differently, he says "There must be another"...I took that with the same tone as someone looking for a sock in a dryer. Not that he MUST MAKE another child...but there has to be another member somewhere...

I thought the moment Dani observed was when he realized his son was not TPTWP...and was relieved.

I'm not sure all that happened from the Harranhal tourney on was all based on Rhaegar's plan to force the prophecy...quite the opposite...I think he thought himself free at last of it, and wooing Lyanna was his attempt at living for himself for a change...I could totally see her urging him to follow his heart instead of his "duty"...They flee to the TOJ...Rhaegar is finally free and happy...only to find himself right back in the thick of the prophecy once TMK gets out of hand, war is declared...

Rhaegar may have even thought himself free of the prophecy up until the Trident.

[Dragonfish]

I thought the moment Dani observed was when he realized his son was not TPTWP...and was relieved.

I don't see how that interpretation could possibly work. It's at that moment that he declares his son is the PWWP. But according to your theory, he changes his mind five seconds later.

I think it's clear that when Rhaegar says "there must be one more" and "the dragon has three heads," he's not changing his mind about anything, he's saying that there must be three heads of the dragon, and so far there are only two. One of them is Aegon, in his mind, the other could be his daughter Rhaenys. The fact that his two children are named after two of the original three conquerors is rather telling as symbolism. I think it shows that Rhaegar believed he needed to have a third child, one he would name Visenya, to complete the symbolism.