R+L=J v.18

[Alia of the knife]

I agree that Rhaegar would have rejected the proposal of Cersei if he knew anything about her character. She was already torturing her baby brother in view of visiting dignitaries back when she was just a girl and maybe that got around. That, and Tywin's own reputation for being merciless and grasping probably didn't endear him to the royal family either...too much potential for Tywin to try to exert his influence in ways Aerys obviously didn't like or feared.

Back on topic, I think we're getting little bits and pieces of nuance about the relationship of Rhaegar and Lyanna and what Rhaegar's motivations may have been. Kevan's thoughts suggest that maybe it was common knowledge that Elia had been set aside Rhaegar had taken another wife. Certainly, we know that the Martell's were not happy with how Elia was being treated prior to grudgingly joining Rhaegar's cause in the war. Does that mean he was just unfaithful to her with another woman, or that he had divorced her? Just speculating, but it would be more honorable to divorce Elia and marry Lyanna if he cared at all about the reputation of both ladies.

In any case, whether Rhaegar eloped with Lord Stark's willing daugther or "kidnapped" her, that goes a way to making some question his sanity, certainly. And maybe it didn't matter if Lyanna was openly willing or not, because he still carried off the daughter of Lord Stark who had a marriage contract with Robert Baratheon.

I can't help thinking that if Rhaegar loved Lyanna as much as Selmy thinks, neither of them would have wanted to let the kingdom think that she had eloped with him willingly. It would have brought dishonor not just on her, but on her House. Perhaps Rhaegar thought that letting everyone think he'd kidnapped her would absolve Lyanna from any blame and that he was willing to take the blame for both of them as long as he got to be with the woman he loved, with the added bonus that she might give him a child.

Exactly.

Though I am not a Martell fan, I'd like to think a noble Rhaegar might give Elia the chance to marry for love, and she couldn't do that still married to him.

She could perhaps marry a gentle widower, and her presence would benefit any children he had, and she knew Cersei and and Tywin.

Perhaps she figured that Lyanna, who went to bat for a boy who was being bullied, might be as good a Mother to Rhaeneys, (whom I'm sure she would get have at least part of the time not being the heir and therefore whose person would not belong to realm the way Aegon would), and Aegon as anyone else.

At least they would be safer with Lyanna than a Cersei, so she could be free to go back to Dorne and be an influence for Arianne and her brothers whose own Mother left them to go back home, because she objected to Doran fostering out their son, or as I said, perhaps marry for love herself.

[corbon]

Thanks for clearing that up! Although the laws of inheritance and for accessing the throne in Westeros are foggy, the firstborn son out of a legitimate polygamous marriage would be called to the throne if the firstborn son of the first marriage perished.

No, just all the (legitimate) male children in order of birth. Which wife is irrelevant.

Since there was only one male child from the first wife, then it works out like that, but the firstborn son from second wife would not rank higher than secondborn from first wife unless he was older.

[Snowistargarynitisknown]

Im starting to think we are all off track being so concerned about if John is legitimate or not. Is he Rhaegar and Lyanna's son? I sure do thing so, but I think maybe Lyanna did just get swept up in romance, if she was half as impulsive as Arya, the niece who reminds Ned so much of his beloved sister, she was not thinking of or preoccupied with things like the throne or being a valid heir, Arya liked to hang out with the butcher's boy and threw the crown prince's sword in the river. (not too caught up on decorum) If Lyanna wanted Rhaegar then gods be damned and rules be broken she would probably do what she wanted. And Rhaegar was the crown prince, if he wants to have the 3rd head to the dragon he could do it without the son...or daughter being legitimate. And wouldn't he have preferred another daughter for Aegon to "marry". Aegon would be the heir regardless of Jon having a legit claim, another male heir wouldn't necessarily be the best third head for the dragon because they could then feel threatened by one another, the original 3 headed dragon was the KING and his 2 SISTERS....I don't think he cared about legitimizing his child with Lyanna as much as we are thinking I mean Rhaegar was how old when all this took place? how old was Lyanna? They were not plotting and scheming, thats Littlefingers job. Rhaegar just needed a third child to be the third head, a Targaryen child for his children to marry with Aegon as the heir. And I know we all want Jon to be legit so he can end up on the throne, but the Jon we all know and love will not betray his Oath, alive or dead, how could he? Then he would not be the Jon we know and love... He is loyal to the NW; the watcher on the wall. If he didn't desert to avenge his father and assist Robb he probably will not desert. He may assist in putting the proper heir on the throne, but I don't think he will sit on it himself. Trust me I would love Jon to get the throne, the girl, the dragon, the happy ending but I do not think that will be the way it plays out. I think he will be the hero, the savior of Westeros but someone ironic or surprising will end up on that throne, and it won't be a popular or predictable person, did we not read these books, Ned's decapitation, Bran's paralysis, Theon Turncloak, the Red Wedding, UnCat, Aegon/Gryff, Tywin's death, this is a series of twists and Jon on the throne is not twisty enough. And didn't I read somewhere that GRRM said in an interview that someone truly unlucky and unlikely would end up with the throne... who is more unlucky or unlikely? Certainly not Jon....he is pretty valiant and courageous a born leader He seems predictable in a way when there are Bran, Stannis, Tyrion, Theon, Doran, Samwell, Sandor, Jamie, even Arya and so many more to choose from...my money is on one of the first three.

[Dragonfish]

And Rhaegar was the crown prince, if he wants to have the 3rd head to the dragon he could do it without the son...or daughter being legitimate. And wouldn't he have preferred another daughter for Aegon to "marry".

If Rhaegar wanted his and Lyanna's daughter to marry Aegon, then that daughter would have to be legitimate, as it would not do for a king to marry a bastard. So basically, your own words support the case you're arguing against.

And I know we all want Jon to be legit so he can end up on the throne, but the Jon we all know and love will not betray his Oath, alive or dead, how could he?

Well, first of all, not everyone who argues Jon was born legitimate wants to see him end up on the throne. They just think the evidence points to his being legitimate.

Second of all, if Jon dies but is reborn from ghost's body, as many speculate will happen, then he will technically have fulfilled his oath ("my watch...shall not end until my death"). Of course, you could argue that that amounts to following the letter of the oath at the expense of its spirit. But whether or not you accept this argument, it's still true that Jon has an escape clause in his oath, if he wishes to opt for it.

[Snowistargarynitisknown]

I see what you are saying about it being sort of imperative that Jon be a legitimate heir. But it seems to me that the theme of Bastard vs. Trueborn seems to be a pretty huge theme in this series, and IMO if GRRM wants to have any relevant social commentary come out of all the attention being paid to who is trueborn and who is a bastard than it would be terribly sad if his most valiant, honorable, noble bastard turns out to be trueborn. I think the irony of this particular area of the book is that Jon is more lordly than mostly all the "Lords" in the story. He is just, and kind, and selfless, he is noble and sympathetic to those weaker than him, he is loyal and honorable and it is a result of his upbringing and his innate nature the characteristics passed down to him by his parents and he does not need to be legitimate to embody those qualities. If GRRM turns him into the Prince that was Promised without "legitimizing" him that would be sooooo much cooler than finding some convenient Targaryen loophole to make him legit. Maybe it would serve as a turning point in the evolution of the hierarchy of Westeros; if Jon could save the world and still be a bastard. Seems a broader minded more socially conscious route to go than making him Rhaegar's legit son by his secret "kidnapped" love that he took as a second wife because his first wife was barren... That would be kinda too General Hospital for me.

And I agree with you that "technically" Jon could escape his oath if he were reborn via Ghost but I think that is like realizing the whole last season of your favorite show was just a dream or that they all really did die in the plane crash in the first place. lol.... I'm hoping that seems too contrived to GRRM.

It seems to contrived for me... It would be like if the last second Ned wasn't really dead that was his secret twin who was beheaded.... Jon is the Lord Commander and he said the words and I'm hoping that the only way he leaves his post is death or the disbandment of the NW that would suck but at least it wouldn't be cheesy... Of all the characters the last one I want to see use a technicality to shirk his responsibility is Lord Snow. It would go against all the things he represents.

[Alia of the knife]

Im starting to think we are all off track being so concerned about if John is legitimate or not. Is he Rhaegar and Lyanna's son? I sure do thing so, but I think maybe Lyanna did just get swept up in romance, if she was half as impulsive as Arya, the niece who reminds Ned so much of his beloved sister, she was not thinking of or preoccupied with things like the throne or being a valid heir, Arya liked to hang out with the butcher's boy and threw the crown prince's sword in the river. (not too caught up on decorum) If Lyanna wanted Rhaegar then gods be damned and rules be broken she would probably do what she wanted. And Rhaegar was the crown prince, if he wants to have the 3rd head to the dragon he could do it without the son...or daughter being legitimate. And wouldn't he have preferred another daughter for Aegon to "marry". Aegon would be the heir regardless of Jon having a legit claim, another male heir wouldn't necessarily be the best third head for the dragon because they could then feel threatened by one another, the original 3 headed dragon was the KING and his 2 SISTERS....I don't think he cared about legitimizing his child with Lyanna as much as we are thinking I mean Rhaegar was how old when all this took place? how old was Lyanna? They were not plotting and scheming, thats Littlefingers job. Rhaegar just needed a third child to be the third head, a Targaryen child for his children to marry with Aegon as the heir. And I know we all want Jon to be legit so he can end up on the throne, but the Jon we all know and love will not betray his Oath, alive or dead, how could he? Then he would not be the Jon we know and love... He is loyal to the NW; the watcher on the wall. If he didn't desert to avenge his father and assist Robb he probably will not desert. He may assist in putting the proper heir on the throne, but I don't think he will sit on it himself. Trust me I would love Jon to get the throne, the girl, the dragon, the happy ending but I do not think that will be the way it plays out. I think he will be the hero, the savior of Westeros but someone ironic or surprising will end up on that throne, and it won't be a popular or predictable person, did we not read these books, Ned's decapitation, Bran's paralysis, Theon Turncloak, the Red Wedding, UnCat, Aegon/Gryff, Tywin's death, this is a series of twists and Jon on the throne is not twisty enough. And didn't I read somewhere that GRRM said in an interview that someone truly unlucky and unlikely would end up with the throne... who is more unlucky or unlikely? Certainly not Jon....he is pretty valiant and courageous a born leader He seems predictable in a way when there are Bran, Stannis, Tyrion, Theon, Doran, Samwell, Sandor, Jamie, even Arya and so many more to choose from...my money is on one of the first three.

It is was well known that Rhaegar loved Lyanna, so I'd doubt he'd take the chance their child would be born a bastard.

I also think Jon is meant for bigger things than the Iron Throne.

Being "wild" doesn't necessarily translate into impulsiveness- it just means you don't follow the status quo rules, which those rules may not be the right and just ones anyway.

We see two notorious known acts of "wildness" on the part of Arya and Lyanna, and it was on behalf of someone else.

In Lyannas case, she defended a Crannogman, and in Aryas case, she defended a butchers boy.

Both girls were probably more honorable than all the Knights in the Seven Kingdoms.

I'd bet when the would-be murderers of Jon attempt to get rid of his body, say burning him to conceal his "death," he has a "ressurection" a la Dany, and is reborn from the flames, therefore no more homage to an oath that no longer is relevant, and he is reborn from all the things that made him the bastard Jon Snow.

He is now free to be who he was meant to be, and that is all of them, (Westeros), and none of them, (something greater than the Kingdom).

[corbon]

I see what you are saying about it being sort of imperative that Jon be a legitimate heir.

Its not imperative. Many people think the story would be better without it.

You are missing the most important point.

The evidence leads in that direction. Whatever it does for the story (and opinion is mixed on that) is irrelevant. Jon being legitimate (probably) is based on evidence within the story, not what it does for the story.

[Snowistargarynitisknown]

I don't think there is any HARD evidence that he is legit. There is groundwork for him being Rhaegar and Lyanna's son without a doubt, but where is the evidence that he is legit? Because the 3 Kingsguard were there protecting the TOJ. Ummmm idk if im buying that.

Lets say you are a kingsguard sworn to the Mad King...when do you pretty much stop listening to him and start listening to his charismatic oldest son?? Now throw in on top of that the fact that you happen to be BFF with said Crown Prince... add a little of the star crossed lovers separated whilst one is languishing in her bloody bed, and maybe you would be inclined to protect said Lady while your BFF fights for his life regardless of the legitimacy of the child. Rhaegar is dead, his son Aegon is dead, his brother Viserys is spirited away to dragonstone and or already across the sea, this childs legitamacy is not the issue, loyalty is the issue then, he is the last of Rhaegar's blood, your BF and Crown Prince's son and the knowledge that Robert the usurper would certainly kill the babe whether he was legit or not has to count for something. If the Kingsguard at the TOJ is the only thing that implies Jon is legit i'm not buying in.. And wouldn't Mr "do the right thing" Eddard have insisted that his nephew the legit heir be placed on the throne, he is so keen on having Stannis take his rightful place I think he would have had a hard time morally for hiding the legit heir to the throne. But a bastard he could spirit away with less guilt a la Gendry.

Trust me I wholly believe that it can go either way i'm not saying Jon can't be legit... Im just HOPING he remains the bastard I love him for being.

[Snowistargarynitisknown]

I picture Jon saving Westeros from the others, being proved to be the heir or whatever but living out his days a la Master Aemmon on the wall. That would be the noble ending I want for his character. Let him be the PTWP let him be the legit son and heir I don't care, I think that whole part with Aemmon revealing himself was foreshadowing, I think that Jon attempting to leave the NW for the father and 1/2 brother he loves but not going in the end was telling, I think that he will somehow survive as you said by a rebirth in flames and will lead the way and do great things but I just don't think it should matter that much if he is a Bastard or Legit. I know in the society of Westeros as it is currently it does matter, but I think it would be cooler if he is the exception that changes the rule, why make such a great big deal about Bastards vs trueborn if its not to challenge the rules?? Seems like if something is such a huge theme it has to be for a reason and to uphold the integrity of how important it is does not seem to be what GRRM is driving towards... we currently have bastards all over the seats of power in Westeros, Tommen on the iron throne, the Bastard of Bolton ruling over Winterfell, is it really as 1 dimensional as Jon is good, therefore he must not REALLY be a bastard?? Seems to me Gendry was pretty noble and he is a bastard... and Robert is trueborn but a total butthead as are Stannis and Renly, and Doran and Tywin, and LF and Walder Frey and god knows who else.... I would like to see Sandor the un-knight rescue the Lady... and Jon the bastard save the world... that seems poetic to me... not contriving a way for Jon to be a righful heir...

[corbon]

I don't think there is any HARD evidence that he is legit. There is groundwork for him being Rhaegar and Lyanna's son without a doubt, but where is the evidence that he is legit? Because the 3 Kingsguard were there protecting the TOJ. Ummmm idk if im buying that. ...

Rhaegar is dead, his son Aegon is dead, his brother Viserys is spirited away to dragonstone and or already across the sea, this childs legitamacy is not the issue,

You need to read up a bit this has been argued dozens of times just in this version of this thread.

Summarising (again!), you are sort of right, the issue is not Jon's legitimacy. The issue is that the KG have not detached any of their number to go to Viserys on Dragonstone, and clearly think that they are fulfilling their vows by fighting to the death here and now at ToJ.

The primary function of the KG is to always have at least one member with the king, guarding him. So clearly, Viserys is not the rightful Targaryen heir in the eyes of the KG - Viserys being the true King and the KG still be holding to their vows are mutually exclusive, since their vows require them to send at least one KG member to the king and they have not and do not.

So there must be someone higher in the succession than Viserys still alive. Aerys is dead, Rhaegar is dead, Aegon is dead (supposedly). That leaves only an unknown middle brother between Rhaegar and Viserys (no chance) or another legitimate male issue of Rhaegar. Or Aegon-still-alive.

And curiously enough, we believe that there is a male issue of Rhaegar (Jon) right here, where the KG are willing to fight to the death.

Therefore, that male issue must be legitimate, because Viserys is clearly not whom the KG believe their vows call them to protect first.

Alternately, baby Aegon is at the ToJ, but that struggles on several levels (though it is possible).

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

You need to read up a bit this has been argued dozens of times just in this version of this thread.

Summarising (again!), you are sort of right, the issue is not Jon's legitimacy. The issue is that the KG have not detached any of their number to go to Viserys on Dragonstone, and clearly think that they are fulfilling their vows by fighting to the death here and now at ToJ.

The primary function of the KG is to always have at least one member with the king, guarding him. So clearly, Viserys is not the rightful Targaryen heir in the eyes of the KG - Viserys being the true King and the KG still be holding to their vows are mutually exclusive, since their vows require them to send at least one KG member to the king and they have not and do not.

So there must be someone higher in the succession than Viserys still alive. Aerys is dead, Rhaegar is dead, Aegon is dead (supposedly). That leaves only an unknown middle brother between Rhaegar and Viserys (no chance) or another legitimate male issue of Rhaegar. Or Aegon-still-alive.

And curiously enough, we believe that there is a male issue of Rhaegar (Jon) right here, where the KG are willing to fight to the death.

Therefore, that male issue must be legitimate, because Viserys is clearly not whom the KG believe their vows call them to protect first.

Alternately, baby Aegon is at the ToJ, but that struggles on several levels (though it is possible).

Well said.

I'll just add a couple of other points.

1. When Rhaegar (and Aerys) died, whatever orders he may have given to the Kingsguard died with him. Their duty would have immediately passed to the new king who would be, if you believe that Jon isn't legitimate, Viserys. So the idea that "they're there because Rhaegar ordered them to be there" doesn't hold water once Rhaegar is dead. Rhaegar might have initially ordered them to be there, but something else had to have kept them there after he died.

2. The Kingsguard members know exactly what's going on and that Viserys is on Dragonstone. They would have had at least a few weeks to get at least one of them out there to him. So it's not a matter of "Viserys is the king but they haven't had time to get someone to him." They've had enough time — even if he hadn't arrived yet, a member could have easily been en route — and more than that, when Ned tells them that Viserys is on Dragonstone, they shrug it off, almost as if they don't even care.

If it quacks like a duck, looks like a duck, and waddles like a duck, it's a duck.

[Dragonfish]

I don't think there is any HARD evidence that he is legit. There is groundwork for him being Rhaegar and Lyanna's son without a doubt, but where is the evidence that he is legit? Because the 3 Kingsguard were there protecting the TOJ. Ummmm idk if im buying that.

Lets say you are a kingsguard sworn to the Mad King...when do you pretty much stop listening to him and start listening to his charismatic oldest son?? Now throw in on top of that the fact that you happen to be BFF with said Crown Prince... add a little of the star crossed lovers separated whilst one is languishing in her bloody bed, and maybe you would be inclined to protect said Lady while your BFF fights for his life regardless of the legitimacy of the child. Rhaegar is dead, his son Aegon is dead, his brother Viserys is spirited away to dragonstone and or already across the sea, this childs legitamacy is not the issue, loyalty is the issue then, he is the last of Rhaegar's blood, your BF and Crown Prince's son and the knowledge that Robert the usurper would certainly kill the babe whether he was legit or not has to count for something.

Two problems with this:

1) During their conversation with Ned, the Kingsguard specifically highlight their oath as a reason for why they are not running. They don't say anything about "loyalty to an old friend" being a reason; only their oath. So whatever explanation we come up with for why they were there has to take into account the fact that the Kingsguard believe they are acting within full compliance of their oath. And what do we know the First Duty of the Kingsguard is, according to Barristan? Of course, it is to protect the king.

2) Protecting Jon out of loyalty to Rhaegar and protecting Viserys out of compliance to their oath are not mutually exclusive goals. The three of them could easily have sent one of their number to Dragonstone in order to protect Viserys, while the remaining two stayed to protect Jon. Yet this is not what they did. All three of them stayed, despite the fact that their rightful king was (supposedly) on Dragonstone without Kingsguard protection. This strikes me as a major dereliction of duty, which would not only be out of character for them, but would also contradict their stated goal of staying to fulfill their oath. Therefore, the best explanation for their actions, IMO, is that the true heir is in fact at the ToJ.

And wouldn't Mr "do the right thing" Eddard have insisted that his nephew the legit heir be placed on the throne, he is so keen on having Stannis take his rightful place I think he would have had a hard time morally for hiding the legit heir to the throne. But a bastard he could spirit away with less guilt a la Gendry.

Uh...Mr "do the right thing" Eddard had already rebelled against the Targaryens, who had been, of course, his rightful kings. It makes no sense that he would suddenly do a 180 just to put his nephew on the throne (especially since the throne was likely to kill him in the long run).

[Houndbird]

I would love to see Jon with Dany at the end. Don't know why people don't like her. I think her character is so humane which is lacking in so many of the other characters. Hate her with Daario though. hope he gets killed in the next book or proves to be a betrayer. she would make a great queen

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

I would love to see Jon with Dany at the end. Don't know why people don't like her. I think her character is so humane which is lacking in so many of the other characters. Hate her with Daario though. hope he gets killed in the next book or proves to be a betrayer. she would make a great queen

:ack:

[Arya Targaryen]

I would love to see Jon with Dany at the end. Don't know why people don't like her. I think her character is so humane which is lacking in so many of the other characters. Hate her with Daario though. hope he gets killed in the next book or proves to be a betrayer. she would make a great queen

I have no problem with Dany apart from being an awful ruler. She is a good conqueror, though, very charismatic, but I don't think she would do a fine job on the Iron throne (in peace-time I mean). Jon would do much better, but I just don't wish him that, he would definitely hate staying in the south.

Dany should go back to the Dothraki. Jon should stay in the North (King, LC or just Regent for Rickon/Bran). Iron throne? I don't know, and don't really care. Stannis/Aegon/Tyrion would be fine.

[GoodKingAlf]

Crackpot time.

This might have already been suggested... But I'm re-reading GOT and when Ned is in jail he talks about 'broken promises' and when he thinks about Jon he thinks about shame.

Then, I thought about Ned's feelings towards killing children...

What if.... Lyanna was taken by force by Rhaegar in order to fulfil his prophecy. What if the King's Guard stayed behind at the ToJ after Rhaegar was killed to protect Jon...

But, what if promise that Ned made to Lyanna was to kill Jon?

If he was a child of rape perhaps Lyanna wanted rid of him?

Jon would feel shame for breaking his promise to Lyanna, but obviosuly it's a promise Ned could never keep anyway.

[imany]

I have no problem with Dany apart from being an awful ruler. She is a good conqueror, though, very charismatic, but I don't think she would do a fine job on the Iron throne (in peace-time I mean). Jon would do much better, but I just don't wish him that, he would definitely hate staying in the south.

Dany should go back to the Dothraki. Jon should stay in the North (King, LC or just Regent for Rickon/Bran). Iron throne? I don't know, and don't really care. Stannis/Aegon/Tyrion would be fine.

I'm not so sure Dany would be a bad ruler in peacetime. Once of the reasons she's a bad current ruler is because she conquered a city-state with values completely different than her own; in Westeros, which is anti-slavery etc., I feel she would have a better chance. Another problem was that she was originally unwilling to compromise, but I think marrying Loraq shows she is willing to sacrifice herself for her people. Problem three was that she didn't have any politically savvy advisors. Throw Tyrion into the mix and I think her rule would end up all right. She has definitely earned loyalty from those who follow her.

I don't think Jon would be a bad ruler, but he's obviously blind to the people around him, hence getting backstabbed by his own men. I can't see that he would be better than Dany, especially in a snakepit like KL.

Re: Jon's legitimacy. Assuming R+L=J, then the only person alive who would be believed about Jon's heritage is Howland Reed, if I am not mistaken, and his people are mocked as frogeaters etc., so I'm not even sure about that. There might be staff from ToJ and a septon who married them, but I think they would be less likely to come forward or be believed than Reed.

The Kingsguard defending the royal family is a good indicator to the audience, but everyone but Jaime and Ser Barristan is dead from Aerys' Kingsguard, and neither of them seem to know much about Jon. I'm wondering if Jon will ever find out about his own heritage. I think he might not, that someone else will find out and purposely not tell him.

I think with regard to Jon as a potential heir, whether he is legitimate or not is less important than whether or not he will be accepted as legitimate even if his parentage comes out. He is known as Ned's bastard; I think it will be very, very difficult to convince the Westeros Great Houses that Jon is a legitimate Targaryen, because Lyanna was said to have been kidnapped and nothing was ever said about the existence of a child. Aegon has a much better chance, and I wouldn't say his is good.

Edit: regarding Lyanna wanting to have Jon killed, I find that very unlikely since Ned also notes:

Ned thought, if it came to that, the life of some child I did not know, against Robb and Sansa and Arya and Bran and Rickon, what would I do? Even more so, what would Catelyn do, if it were Jon’s life, against the children of her body? He did not know. He prayed he never would.

It doesn't strictly answer that question, but I feel it's a good indicator that Ned had never been put in a position where he needed to kill a child.

[Ghost714]

I would love to see Jon with Dany at the end. Don't know why people don't like her. I think her character is so humane which is lacking in so many of the other characters. Hate her with Daario though. hope he gets killed in the next book or proves to be a betrayer. she would make a great queen

I agree with this whole heartedly. Finally someone else who is loyal to Danaerys!!!! I think her an Jon together, could be, and would be great. Now wether or not I think this will actually happen....that's a different story.

[DrogEriGalOn]

^{This doesn't really have any bearing on the outcome of events, but just a thought that occurred to me. What if Rhaegar was led to fall in love with Lyanna because of a prophecy he had heard? Maybe the prophecy included something about a blue rose and the third head of the dragon. We know that Rhaegar knew about TPTWP prophecy and believed his son Aegon to be the prince. But we also know that the dragon should have 3 heads. Maybe he pursued Lyanna because of this. I mean, Rhaegar is made out to be this amazing knight, great swordsman, honorable guy...so why does he cheat on his wife who he has two children with? Is he just bored of her? Could just be a slip up or too much Lyanna temptation, but it doesn't seem to be in his character from what we heard of him throughout the books. I guess there is no way to confirm this, but it is something that crossed my mind.}

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

^{This doesn't really have any bearing on the outcome of events, but just a thought that occurred to me. What if Rhaegar was led to fall in love with Lyanna because of a prophecy he had heard? Maybe the prophecy included something about a blue rose and the third head of the dragon. We know that Rhaegar knew about TPTWP prophecy and believed his son Aegon to be the prince. But we also know that the dragon should have 3 heads. Maybe he pursued Lyanna because of this. I mean, Rhaegar is made out to be this amazing knight, great swordsman, honorable guy...so why does he cheat on his wife who he has two children with? Is he just bored of her? Could just be a slip up or too much Lyanna temptation, but it doesn't seem to be in his character from what we heard of him throughout the books. I guess there is no way to confirm this, but it is something that crossed my mind.}

This is actually a good line of questioning that people have been trying to work through.

It seems like it can be reasonably inferred that Rhaegar thought he needed three children to "fulfill" the prophecy. Though I see no evidence for it in other interpretations of the prophecy, it seemed like he equated or associated the prophecy with the original three Targaryen conquerors: Aegon, Rhaenys and Visenya. That he named two of his children after the conquerors kind of supports this. He was probably expecting a girl as the third child, a Visenya.

The obvious hang-up here is that Elia couldn't have any more children after Aegon. We're told this and told repeatedly of how frail she was. So even if Rhaegar had wanted to have a third child with her, he wouldn't have been able to, just because of her health. In a twisted way, this somewhat hints at his fondness for her — knowing another pregnancy would kill her, he didn't even try.

As to Lyanna, I think it's a matter of both him actually falling in love with her and him thinking that she's a good vehicle for the prophecy. I suspect that, at the time, Rhaegar did think that Aegon was the prince that was promised, except for one crucial element that he later discovered to be missing: ice. "His is the song of ice and fire." A baby that's half-Targaryen and half-Martell (the sun-and-spears) is decidedly lacking in the ice department. But a baby who's half-Targaryen and half-Stark, well, that's a different matter altogether ...