R + L = J Part XXIV

[An Ironborn Son]

If Rhaegar had a legitimate son who was still living after Aerys, Rhaegar and "Aegon" were killed, then that son would be the rightful heir, not Viserys. In my mind, the very presence of the Kingsguard at the Tower of Joy is the biggest red flag that the legal heir is there.

I get the fact that Jon would be the heir at that point...but I guess I'm shaky on the timeline for how long the KG have been there. It was my understanding they'd been there long before the Mad King was slain, thereby making the heir point rather moot. I could be wrong but I don't understand why Dayne wouldn't have been closer to the action at any point before that.

Now as to why Ned didn't tell Jon, I think we several points throughout GoT where Ned decides who gets to hear certain pieces of information. The first time that it was really apparent to me was when he allowed Arya to keep Needle and didn't tell Catelyn about it. I think the reason that he never told Jon about his parentage was that if he actually told his son about his mother that would be him finally completely admitting to the deed. Remember that several characters talk about him being very honorable but that's not the same as honesty. I feel that if he ever quite comes clean about what happened with Wylla or Ashura would make him no better than Robert, making him just another sword that sleeps around.

[Phreadde the Mummer]

The KG was at the TOJ before Aerys was slain... but remember, they left at least the one KG, Jaime Lannister, with him, safe in Kings Landing in a big stone house. They didn't anticipate that one of their own would piss on his oath and turn Kingslayer. In fact, they say as much to Ned.

As to Ned "admitting to the deed", time and time again he admits openly of errors, and he certainly isn't avoiding the issue by raising "his bastard" under his roof, openly. It simply isn't logical that he wouldn't tell Jon his mother's name "from shame".

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

As to Ned "admitting to the deed", time and time again he admits openly of errors, and he certainly isn't avoiding the issue by raising "his bastard" under his roof, openly. It simply isn't logical that he wouldn't tell Jon his mother's name "from shame".

Agree with this 100%. If Ned really didn't want to be reminded he had a bastard, he wouldn't be raising Jon in the household and treating him more or less the same as his children. How many other future lords share lessons and arms training with their bastard brothers? Probably not many; Catelyn even remarks on it and says that it's odd. If Ned was ashamed enough of having a bastard to keep Jon's mother's identity from him, he'd be ashamed enough to keep Jon out of sight and out of mind.

As for the Kingsguard, the breakdown was:

Martell, Darry and Selmy: With Rhaegar on the Trident.

Jaime: In King's Landing with Aerys.

Whent, Hightower and Dayne; With Lyanna and Jon, if the theory's true, at the Tower of Joy.

Aerys just had Jaime, but by that time, the city was pretty much on virtual lockdown and no one was getting in or out. There was probably no reason to think that Aerys needed that many guards, whereas Rhaegar was going into a war zone and the Tower of Joy was largely undefended.

[Galen M]

Jon can ask those questions, but Ned can answer in as much detail as he wants to. And I simply don't see why Ned would refrain from telling Jon who his mother is simply because he doesn't want to have to answer Jon's questions. That seem kind of selfish to me, actually.

Well, maybe Ned doesn't want to have a partial conversation with Jon, maybe he feels he owes him more than just a name. If Ned were really Jon's father, I could understand feeling him that way and not believing that Jon was old enough for that. Also, are we even sure that Jon ever flat out asked Ned about it? We are only told that Ned never told Jon, and that he refused to talk to about with Catelyn.

Each of the main points to RLJ can be refuted on an individual basis, but only RLJ ties them together in a holistic manner. I think we can all agree on that, no?

[An Ironborn Son]

Holistic in the manner that RLJ has the best established timeline but even then, I think if someone really wanted too they could at least set out a reasonable chain of events. I mean, no one in Westeros seems to have figured it out...

I think the whole thing points towards Ned's complexity as a character. Sure, he admits faults and shortcomings at certain points but as I said, he doesn't come completely clean on others, we even have the most critical moment when he could have told his best friend in the entire world that his 'children' are the product of incest but instead holds his tongue. What does this say about the most honest man in the Kingdoms? I'm not saying that he doesn't accept that he produced a bastard but of any people still involved in the whole matter we have to see Jon and Catelyn being the only two people in the world he would truly feel that he had injured by his actions. Even by his own accord he's inconsistent about things, he tells Catelyn not to ask about Jon's mother yet as has been pointed out raises the kid right in her face.

As to the KG, I agree that at least one knight was with the King at the time of his death but why were none with Elia? I still don't get that at all...

[Dragonfish]

Well, maybe Ned doesn't want to have a partial conversation with Jon, maybe he feels he owes him more than just a name. If Ned were really Jon's father, I could understand feeling him that way and not believing that Jon was old enough for that. Also, are we even sure that Jon ever flat out asked Ned about it? We are only told that Ned never told Jon, and that he refused to talk to about with Catelyn.

My point was that if Ned is not telling Jon about his mother simply because he wants to avoid the prospect of him asking a few questions, then that's a bit selfish, IMO. I really don't see why he can't at least throw Jon a bone regarding his mother. That's a lot better than absolute silence, I think, because the latter simply leads to Jon coming up with his own wild hypotheses and scenarios.

Also, even if Ned didn't tell Jon up to the events of AGoT because of his age, surely he would at least have told him something before he went to the Night's Watch, yes?

Each of the main points to RLJ can be refuted on an individual basis, but only RLJ ties them together in a holistic manner. I think we can all agree on that, no?

Well, I don't really agree that all of the main points can be refuted on an individual basis. But I can certainly agree that R+L=J addresses all off them holistically.

[Dragonfish]

As to the KG, I agree that at least one knight was with the King at the time of his death but why were none with Elia? I still don't get that at all...

The Red Keep was only left with one knight when Rhaegar rode off with the remaining Kingsguard to fight at the Trident. Before that there were at least four knights, until Barristan and Lewyn Martell rode off to marshal loyalist forces, at which point there were still two knights left. And in addition to those knights, there were still hundreds of soldiers guarding a heavily fortified King's Landing. So I think Elia was just fine, so long as the loyalist forces were doing fine.

[Phreadde the Mummer]

The Red Keep was only left with one knight when Rhaegar rode off with the remaining Kingsguard to fight at the Trident. Before that there were at least four knights, until Barristan and Lewyn Martell rode off to marshal loyalist forces, at which point there were still two knights left. And in addition to those knights, there were still hundreds of soldiers guarding a heavily fortified King's Landing. So I think Elia was just fine, so long as the loyalist forces were doing fine.

True, yet I think it really is another indicator that the true heir was not with Elia. Had he been, there should have been at least one KG there, and really the majority that were not with the king himself.

Anecdotal and circumstantial or not, there is just far too much evidence in favor of the theory for it not to be true... unless there is something pretty major that hasn't been hinted at yet, which doesn't fit with the dangling clues all over the series.

[starki]

1. When on earth would Robert have gotten Lyanna pregnant? By the time Jon was conceived, according to Martin's timeline, the war had started and Lyanna was already missing. We also have Robert's bastards as evidence of his features' genetic dominance, yet Jon looks like a Stark. He's not Robert's son.

2. It's not that Ned was "rushing" to tell people what happened. I don't think anyone is saying that he was. But going to Starfall gave him the chance to 1. return Dawn, 2. return Wylla, if she was at the Tower of Joy and 3. leave for the north by a secure port. He may have wanted to "beat" Catelyn and Robb back to Winterfell and have Jon's position in the household secure before their arrival, who knows. And this would be true whether Jon was Lyanna's son or not; he would have been born somewhere in the south, and both non-Lyanna contenders for his mother are Dornish or have Dornish ties.

3. I'm not saying that Dany's claim ISN'T based on rights, just that, for the moment, she can carry out her will primarily through the dragons. Your argument was that another male Targaryen would make Dany's story "pointless," and I pointed out that Martin obviously disagrees with this sentiment, based on what he introduced in ADWD.

4. You're trying to talk about the Kingsguard in the context of Rhaegar's orders. I'm trying to tell you that Rhaegar's orders basically became moot when he died. The only reason they would have to still be at the Tower of Joy AFTER Rhaegar was already dead, instead of on Dragonstone with Viserys, is if the real heir was in the Tower. I don't know how to make it any plainer. They also call Robert the "usurper" when Ned gets there; they're certainly not trying to defend Lyanna in the context of her being his future wife, that's absurd.

5. You didn't really defend the idea that Ned has been haunted for a decade and a half because he promised to bury his sister in the family crypt. I fail to see how that would make him feel guilty and like he was continuously living a lie. And that's completely ignoring other circumstantial evidence, such as the blue rose on the ice wall that Dany sees in her prophecy.

6. As to your last paragraph, I'll just say that you really need to read ADWD if that's your main argument against Jon being Rhaegar and Lyanna's son — "a male Targaryen heir makes Dany's role pointless."

7. You still didn't answer my primary question: If Ashara or Wylla is Jon's mother, why wouldn't Ned be able to say so?

1. Like I said...theoretically. The timeline pretty much rules it out.

2. Two candidates ? I thought Ashara Dayne is the only other candidate next to Lyanna. (I don't believe it's Wylla). And what is the right time to tell Jon that his mother was overcome with grief and killed herself and that he (or more likely, still, Brandon Stark and Ned took the blame) ashamed her by not marrying her ? Or that Eddard was among the very soldiers that killed Ashara's brother ?

3. Well, I'll just have to wait and read ADWD when it is translated. I still say an older male Targaryen heir, which is what Jon is if Lyanna and Rhaegar are his parents and they got married, torpedoes the legality of Daenerys' claim. Not to mention Jon has had zero hints of being heir to anything, let alone Iron Throne, unlike Daenerys. Who is, at this point, the only Targaryen around.

4. The orders were clearly not any less valid when Rhaegar died. The KG wasn't allowed to desert Lyanna if/when Rhaegar should die. Why would the KG be with the safely-smuggled-to-Dragonstone Viserys when they can be protecting the Mad King, Rhaegar - the heir, and Lyanna, the potential Queen. (for all we know they might have gotten married during their escape after the Tournament and the Rebellion). I also fully expect anyone loyal to Targaryen to call Robert an usurper.

5. Some of it is being haunted by her death, along with Ashara. (see point no. 2)

6. It's not the only argument. Ashara Dayne has a very plausible case for being Jon's mother.

7. See, once more, point no. 2. And the source is IMO credible; Barristan Selmy, hounourable man and member of KG.

[The Greatmatt]

2. Two candidates ? I thought Ashara Dayne is the only other candidate next to Lyanna. (I don't believe it's Wylla). And what is the right time to tell Jon that his mother was overcome with grief and killed herself and that he (or more likely, still, Brandon Stark and Ned took the blame) ashamed her by not marrying her ? Or that Eddard was among the very soldiers that killed Ashara's brother ?

I have similar thoughts. There's literally nothing about a Wylla-mother situation that makes Ned's reluctance plausible. Ashara on the other hand completely explains the reluctance.

But what to do about the fact that Lyanna made him make a promise that haunts him to this day? If it's not R+L=J, what is it?

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

1. Like I said...theoretically. The timeline pretty much rules it out.

2. Two candidates ? I thought Ashara Dayne is the only other candidate next to Lyanna. (I don't believe it's Wylla). And what is the right time to tell Jon that his mother was overcome with grief and killed herself and that he (or more likely, still, Brandon Stark and Ned took the blame) ashamed her by not marrying her ? Or that Eddard was among the very soldiers that killed Ashara's brother ?

3. Well, I'll just have to wait and read ADWD when it is translated. I still say an older male Targaryen heir, which is what Jon is if Lyanna and Rhaegar are his parents and they got married, torpedoes the legality of Daenerys' claim. Not to mention Jon has had zero hints of being heir to anything, let alone Iron Throne, unlike Daenerys. Who is, at this point, the only Targaryen around.

4. The orders were clearly not any less valid when Rhaegar died. The KG wasn't allowed to desert Lyanna if/when Rhaegar should die. Why would the KG be with the safely-smuggled-to-Dragonstone Viserys when they can be protecting the Mad King, Rhaegar - the heir, and Lyanna, the potential Queen. (for all we know they might have gotten married during their escape after the Tournament and the Rebellion). I also fully expect anyone loyal to Targaryen to call Robert an usurper.

5. Some of it is being haunted by her death, along with Ashara. (see point no. 2)

6. It's not the only argument. Ashara Dayne has a very plausible case for being Jon's mother.

7. See, once more, point no. 2. And the source is IMO credible; Barristan Selmy, hounourable man and member of KG.

1. OK.

2. I count Ashara and Wylla as candidates because Ned's official story is that it's Wylla. Therefore, even though she's probably not Jon's mother, she still needs to be included among the candidates, even if only as a strawman. As to your "right time" argument, I'd go back to the point that Ned thought it was fine for Bran to see someone beheaded when he was, what, 7 years old? We know that the servants and people at King's Landing were gossiping about Ned's "indiscretions." If nothing else, you'd think that Ned would at least try to set the record straight, but he doesn't, other than offer a half-assed "it was Wylla" story.

3.

If you "still say" that, then you're really, really going to hate ADWD.

4. I'm talking about the Kingsguard bolting to Dragonstone to protect Viserys after it's clear that Aerys, Rhaegar and Aegon are dead. If the three of them were dead and Viserys was the legal heir, all three of them would have been bound for Dragonstone because that's where their monarch would have been. Ned says this himself when he confronts them — "I expected you to be on Dragonstone with Viserys and the queen," in so many words. But they weren't on Dragonstone, they were still at the Tower of Joy. Not just because they were honoring some pre-Trident promise to Rhaegar; by that point, they should have been sworn to Viserys. It was because the legal heir to the throne at that point was in the Tower. I'm not trying to be rude, but I really, really don't see what's so difficult to understand about this.

5. You've basically ceded the point.

6. Explain how then, please? When would Ned, who spent most of the war in the Vale, in the North and fighting in the Riverlands, have had the opportunity to knock up Ashara Dayne, who spent the war in the south? There's a great FAQ section about this on the Citadel site. The locations and timelines just don't add up.

7.

Barristan Selmy also says that Ashara Dayne had a girl. So either he's right and Jon can't be her child, or he's capable of being mistaken, in which case we can't take anything he says about Ashara or the Starks as truth.

ETA: Spoiler tags added, sorry.

[Dragonfish]

True, yet I think it really is another indicator that the true heir was not with Elia.

Well, the true heir (or rather, Rhaegar's heir) was with Elia. Rhaegar's child with Lyanna wouldn't become his heir until Aegon died during the Sack. That's why the location of the Kingsguard before the Sack is not really indicative of anything.

[Dragonfish]

Not to mention Jon has had zero hints of being heir to anything, let alone Iron Throne, unlike Daenerys.

Not true. From ACoK:

"King," croaked the raven. The bird flapped across the air to land on Mormont's shoulder. "King," it said again, strutting back and forth.

"He likes that word," Jon said, smiling.

"An easy word to say. An easy word to like."

"King," the bird said again.

"I think he means for you to have a crown, my lord."

"The realm has three kings already, and that's two too many for my liking." Mormont stroked the raven under the beak with his finger, but all the while his eyes never left Jon Snow.

ETA: Also, I'm not a mod or anything, but I'd like to remind everyone that ADWD spoilers are supposed to be kept under spoiler tags.

[Phreadde the Mummer]

Well, the true heir (or rather, Rhaegar's heir) was with Elia. Rhaegar's child with Lyanna wouldn't become his heir until Aegon died during the Sack. That's why the location of the Kingsguard before the Sack is not really indicative of anything.

The thing is, is must be indicative of something. The KG was not in the habit of just riding around aimlessly, leaving the royal family exposed. Why would three of their number be at ToJ to begin with, and not with someone in more direct line of succession? I appreciate your point, to an extent, but for me their presence really is vital.

[Dragonfish]

The thing is, is must be indicative of something. The KG was not in the habit of just riding around aimlessly, leaving the royal family exposed. Why would three of their number be at ToJ to begin with, and not with someone in more direct line of succession? I appreciate your point, to an extent, but for me their presence really is vital.

The Kingsguard swear an oath to follow orders. If they were ordered to go to the tower by the king or by Rhaegar, then they would go there. There's nothing unusual about that.

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

The thing is, is must be indicative of something. The KG was not in the habit of just riding around aimlessly, leaving the royal family exposed. Why would three of their number be at ToJ to begin with, and not with someone in more direct line of succession? I appreciate your point, to an extent, but for me their presence really is vital.

You do make a good point, and I've seen a few explanations.

1. Elia and the other children were in a heavily fortified castle in a heavily fortified city and probably in less danger than, say, Lyanna and her child would have been in a keep in the middle of nowhere. There's also the idea that Aerys was more or less keeping Elia as a hostage to ensure the continued support of the Martells. He could have barred access to her out of paranoia; one Kingsguard member was her uncle and another was her family's bannerman.

2. It could be down to Rhaegar's interpretation of the prophecy. This theory is far more tenuous, but here it goes. We know that Rhaegar thought that the Prince That Was Promised would have "the song of ice and fire." Dany sees him say this in her vision, referring to Aegon. But what if, when he ran off with Lyanna (and, I believe, married her polygamously), he decided that their child, who actually would have been born from ice (Lyanna) and fire (Rhaegar), would be the "real" PTWP? At that point, he could have been making guardianship decisions based not as much on legal succession to the Iron Throne, but on protecting a "savior" with a higher calling. It's pretty cold to Elia and her children, but it does somewhat account for the discrepancy. Up until the point when he died (his death being the demarcation), Rhaegar was calling the shots with the Kingsguard who were in the field. So he must have had some reason, rational or not, for "valuing" Lyanna and her baby above Elia and hers — unless he really did think that Elia was safe enough at King's Landing and/or couldn't override orders his father had given about access to her. But when Rhaegar died, those orders would have been moot, and from that point, the presence of the Kingsguard at the Tower would have been to protect the legal heir. Basically, it's two different causes (Rhaegar's orders, and Rhaegar, Aerys and Aegon's deaths) with the same seamless outcome (three Kingsguard members guarding Jon at the Tower of Joy).

[The Greatmatt]

4. I'm talking about the Kingsguard bolting to Dragonstone to protect Viserys after it's clear that Aerys, Rhaegar and Aegon are dead. If the three of them were dead and Viserys was the legal heir, all three of them would have been bound for Dragonstone because that's where their monarch would have been. Ned says this himself when he confronts them — "I expected you to be on Dragonstone with Viserys and the queen," in so many words. But they weren't on Dragonstone, they were still at the Tower of Joy. Not just because they were honoring some pre-Trident promise to Rhaegar; by that point, they should have been sworn to Viserys. It was because the legal heir to the throne at that point was in the Tower. I'm not trying to be rude, but I really, really don't see what's so difficult to understand about this.

Yeah, I think this is a really strong point. Were Rhaegar the king, I could imagine him saying something like "Protect this woman above all others, even if another Targ becomes king" and the KG would follow (though hard to imagine a king giving that order), but Rhaegar was a mere prince. They were sworn to his father, and there's really no way they would have followed an order that permanently re-arranged their priorities away from the new Targ king simply because Rhaegar was in love with some northern girl.

Ned's reaction should remove doubt along these lines, just in case we were unsure of the priorities. Ned knows Lyanna was there, and knows Viserys is presumably the new Targ king, and he (who knows the KG rules better than we do) fully expects them to have left because of this despite the fact that Rhaegar very clearly didn't give the order for them to leave.

What piece of information could Ned have been lacking that would cause him to assume the wrong behavior? And again, one obvious possibility jumps to the forefront: The KG trio isn't protecting Lyanna, they are protecting R & L's child.

[starki]

Apple martini

3. The emphasis on "official story". And I don't think there's a right time to tell Jon all that. It seems neither did Ned. And if Jon was on a very limited "need to know" basis, certainly the servants in KL won't get exclusive story from Ned. It's also wise to keep any potential Targaryen bloodlines on a hush hush level around Lannisters once Robert is dead. My money is on Ashara and Ned's brother, but I think there's entirely too much hoopla about Jon's parentage anyway.

4. As I said, they were obeying Rhaegar's orders. There was no need for Kingsguard to bolt to Dragonstone, lest Robert loyalists be alerted to Targaryens being at Dragonstone at the time. Viserys, Daenerys and their mother.

5. I'm not ceding anything. Ned was clearly haunted by his sister's death. And Ashara's Stark baby shame and her death.

6. Ned - or more likely his brother - had plenty of opportunity with Ashara. I'm not saying Ned is Jon's father. I'm saying he's been covering up for his brother's actions with Ashara all these years.

I'm not seeing the spoilers, no worries.

[starki]

Not true. From ACoK:

We are to believe a talking bird ? I'd like some more evidence than that.

[Dragonfish]

4. As I said, they were obeying Rhaegar's orders. There was no need for Kingsguard to bolt to Dragonstone, lest Robert loyalists be alerted to Targaryens being at Dragonstone at the time. Viserys, Daenerys and their mother.

What? The rebels already know that the remaining Targs are on Dragonstone. Ned himself mentions that fact to the three Kingsguard.

I'm not seeing the spoilers, no worries.

Every time you mention what Barristan Selmy says regarding Ashara Dayne's child, that's a spoiler. That info is only found in ADWD.

We are to believe a talking bird ? I'd like some more evidence than that.

George has used that talking bird as a device to offer omens. It got Jon Snow elected Lord Commander after all, by perching on his shoulder and screeching his name. It is perfectly legitimate to suppose that Martin may also have used the bird as a device to hint at Jon Snow's origin. It's not so much about believing the "testimony" of a bird as it is about picking up on what the author is trying to imply by having the bird say "king" in Jon's presence.