R+L=J v.21

[Summerqueen]

The deaths of Rickard, Brandon, and Elbert were the equivalents of Ned's death 15 years later. Once that was done, there's no putting the genie back in the bottle. And that's assuming Lyanna herself didn't need placating - this is her father & brother we're talking about.

Agreed, you can't just "take back" rebellion, even with good cause. It's an act that requires 100% commitment.

[Ygrain]

Ah, Westeros genetics! Often crazy and random, but still fun to discuss. :cool4:

On the topic of strong vs. weak genes, it is possible for the results to be mixed as with Rhaegar's kids. The Targ genes don't have to be dominant to override other genes - they just need to have "more" of them.

To use my family as an example: Black haired father and blond mother = 3 blond daughters. Logically, that shouldn't have happened. One of us should have had dark hair. But we simply had "more" blond genes in the mix - my mother comes from a family of mostly light-haired people and a large percentage of my fathers family is blond or redheaded - he got his black hair from his mother, who married into a Swedish/Irish family.

So we have two parents with a strong background of blond genes who produced all-blond kids, even with the dark hair gene, which is usually dominant. Also, that so-called dominant black haired gene seems to have disappeared from our family - none of the 4 grandchildren have it either, all of them turned up blond.

I would guess the Targs are no different - they have inbred so long that even when they have half-Targ kids, the silver hair and purple eyes can still show up, as they simply have "more" of those genes.

As far as I know, the family background does not matter; what matters is set of genes which you inherit from your parents. The genes for a particular trait go in pairs - one half from father, one from mother (it is actually more complicated since usually more than one gene affect the trait, but let's stick with the simiplified model). The blonde gene variant is always recessive - this means it makes itself manifest only when there are no dominant genes around, i.e. when a person has the blonde variant from both parents. On the other hand, a black-haired person can either have a set of two dominant black genes, or a combination of black and blonde, in which case black always wins. This is your father's case: the blonde gene from his light-haired father was overriden with his black hair variant from his mother. However, when your black-haired father, with one dominant and one recessive copy of the gene, maried your blonde mother, with two copies of the recessive gene, we have only one dominant copy versus three recessive entering the reproduction: your mother always passes on the recessive blonde gene, while with your father it is 1:1 chance which of the copies made it into the particular sperm cell - in the gene splitting, the dominance/recessiveness plays no role (as far as I know). Statistically, in one of three children, the chance of one having black hair is quite high, but the opposite, three blonde daughters with three sets of recessive genes, is not particularly improbable, either. You and your sisters now can pass on only the blonde recessive gene, and the black gene has disappeared from your side of the family. The hair colour of your children then depends on the pair which your respective husbands have brought in, an on the chance which established which copy was passed on.

[Independent George]

Agreed, you can't just "take back" rebellion, even with good cause. It's an act that requires 100% commitment.

Likewise, from Rhaegar's perspective, any rebellion has to be crushed; generosity with the terms comes later. No matter the cause, legitimizing a rebellion invites more rebellion in the future.

[Gala]

As far as I know, the family background does not matter; what matters is set of genes which you inherit from your parents. The genes for a particular trait go in pairs - one half from father, one from mother (it is actually more complicated since usually more than one gene affect the trait, but let's stick with the simiplified model). The blonde gene variant is always recessive - this means it makes itself manifest only when there are no dominant genes around, i.e. when a person has the blonde variant from both parents. On the other hand, a black-haired person can either have a set of two dominant black genes, or a combination of black and blonde, in which case black always wins. This is your father's case: the blonde gene from his light-haired father was overriden with his black hair variant from his mother. However, when your black-haired father, with one dominant and one recessive copy of the gene, maried your blonde mother, with two copies of the recessive gene, we have only one dominant copy versus three recessive entering the reproduction: your mother always passes on the recessive blonde gene, while with your father it is 1:1 chance which of the copies made it into the particular sperm cell - in the gene splitting, the dominance/recessiveness plays no role (as far as I know). Statistically, in one of three children, the chance of one having black hair is quite high, but the opposite, three blonde daughters with three sets of recessive genes, is not particularly improbable, either. You and your sisters now can pass on only the blonde recessive gene, and the black gene has disappeared from your side of the family. The hair colour of your children then depends on the pair which your respective husbands have brought in, an on the chance which established which copy was passed on.

As I remember from my biology (genetics) classes any kind of genes can't just disappear from the like. People can born with features of their great-great-grandpatents. An example from life: a white woman had a child from an African, their child was white (not even any sign of dark skin), but their grandson was born with black skin (I hope it doesn't sound like racist because I am not aware how exactly it should sound in English to be polite, sorry if it is, I didn't mean to). My point is: the genes do not disappear like magic and, for example, you children can possess feature of your grandmother or grandfather.

AS for Targ features: it seems they are recessive more than Starks, on the other hand the Tully genes should be also more recessive comparing to the Starks' . Red hair and blue eyes are always recessive even comparing to blond, I know this perfectly, because I'm a forth child and the only one, who possesses my fathers red hair, and none of us has his blue eyes, though, my brothers and sister are blonds with black eyes and I'm red with dark green eyes, which I got from my grandfather.

Could it (such genetics) be just GRRM's 'mistake'? Or probably Tully's 'seed' is more strong?

Edit: I've just remembered Mikhail Bulgakov's quote from "Master and Margarita" about blood and genes, well it actually has more deeper meaning than that, but still: "How bizarre the deck is shuffled! Blood!"

[teemo]

What is "Aegon's" eye color?

I'm new to this thread and subject, and I'm sorry if that has been discussed to death, but I'm doing a series re-read and had a question about this theory. Even if Jon is the product of L+R, isn't he still technically a bastard? He would have super noble blood, but unless Lyanna and Rhaegar were married....am I missing something? Obviously.

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

What is "Aegon's" eye color?

I think it's violet that looks blue because Young Griff dyes his hair. It's important to remember though that Valyrian features are more common in Essos than in Westeros.

I'm new to this thread and subject, and I'm sorry if that has been discussed to death, but I'm doing a series re-read and had a question about this theory. Even if Jon is the product of L+R, isn't he still technically a bastard? He would have super noble blood, but unless Lyanna and Rhaegar were married....am I missing something? Obviously.

If he was a bastard and illegitimate, the three Kingsguard would not have stayed at the Tower after Rhaegar, Aerys and Aegon were killed. They'd've gone to Dragonstone to guard Viserys. The fact that they stayed should be taken, in my opinion, as circumstantial evidence that Jon was legitimate.

[Alia of the knife]

As I remember from my biology (genetics) classes any kind of genes can't just disappear from the like. People can born with features of their great-great-grandpatents. An example from life: a white woman had a child from an African, their child was white (not even any sign of dark skin), but their grandson was born with black skin (I hope it doesn't sound like racist because I am not aware how exactly it should sound in English to be polite, sorry if it is, I didn't mean to). My point is: the genes do not disappear like magic and, for example, you children can possess feature of your grandmother or grandfather.

AS for Targ features: it seems they are recessive more than Starks, on the other hand the Tully genes should be also more recessive comparing to the Starks' . Red hair and blue eyes are always recessive even comparing to blond, I know this perfectly, because I'm a forth child and the only one, who possesses my fathers red hair, and none of us has his blue eyes, though, my brothers and sister are blonds with black eyes and I'm red with dark green eyes, which I got from my grandfather.

Could it (such genetics) be just GRRM's 'mistake'? Or probably Tully's 'seed' is more strong?

Edit: I've just remembered Mikhail Bulgakov's quote from "Master and Margarita" about blood and genes, well it actually has more deeper meaning than that, but still: "How bizarre the deck is shuffled! Blood!"

My friends Great Grandmother was Native American, and her second son was born, with almost Asian features.

She and her Husband both are of mainly European extract, so yes, her Great Grandmother showed up in her second son- it happens.

My Mothers family has a lot of Native American- her side of the family are all dark skinned with black hair and brown eyes, but I took after my Dads side, and I have red hair and blue eyes- moms family teased me and said I was adopted.

[Dark Rider]

I think it's violet that looks blue because Young Griff dyes his hair. It's important to remember though that Valyrian features are more common in Essos than in Westeros.

If he was a bastard and illegitimate, the three Kingsguard would not have stayed at the Tower after Rhaegar, Aerys and Aegon were killed. They'd've gone to Dragonstone to guard Viserys. The fact that they stayed should be taken, in my opinion, as circumstantial evidence that Jon was legitimate.

Right, we know that a bastard can be legitamized if the Father wishes. Hence, the whole Blackfyre ordeal. Plus the whole Bolton bastard becoming legit. So I think Rhaegar could have simply recognized the child as his heir without having to have an annulement or being widowed.

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

Right, we know that a bastard can be legitamized if the Father wishes. Hence, the whole Blackfyre ordeal. Plus the whole Bolton bastard becoming legit. So I think Rhaegar could have simply recognized the child as his heir without having to have an annulement or being widowed.

It takes a king to legitimize a bastard. Rhaegar was never the king, and as such he was never legally able to legitimize Jon, if Jon was born a bastard. Seeing how Aerys treated Elia and her children, Rhaegar probably hid Lyanna from him as much as he did from Robert and the Starks, meaning Aerys wouldn't have been in a position to legitimize Jon, either. The only solution is for Jon to have been born legitimate.

[the Remarkable Other]

It takes a king to legitimize a bastard. Rhaegar was never the king, and as such he was never legally able to legitimize Jon, if Jon was born a bastard. Seeing how Aerys treated Elia and her children, Rhaegar probably hid Lyanna from him as much as he did from Robert and the Starks, meaning Aerys wouldn't have been in a position to legitimize Jon, either. The only solution is for Jon to have been born legitimate.

This. And also Jon was born at the time of the sack of KL, or possibly later, when Aerys was already dead.

[Gala]

My friends Great Grandmother was Native American, and her second son was born, with almost Asian features.

She and her Husband both are of mainly European extract, so yes, her Great Grandmother showed up in her second son- it happens.

My Mothers family has a lot of Native American- her side of the family are all dark skinned with black hair and brown eyes, but I took after my Dads side, and I have red hair and blue eyes- moms family teased me and said I was adopted.

I understand. That was my point: genes just don't disappear and nobody is certain what coloring, looks etc the child will have. Of course, there is genetics math (don't know how it is cold in English) when you playing can solve a riddle to know what percentage of children will have blue eyes, or blond hair or any other feature, but it is really a unexpectedly shuffled deck- you just don't know what cards you will get.

According to the 'law of genetics', Stark genes should be dominant in comparison to the both Targs and Tully. IIRC Targ genes were never strong comparing with the other Westerosi families'.

On the other hand, it is interesting that most children in the series (in different families) got more of their mothers' genes and looks: Catelyne's, Elia's, if R+L=J, Lyanna's; well Cersei is not exactly the right example, but still. The permanent exception is Robert Baratheon: all his (16) children got his look; probably, the same with his brothers' children.

[B'Tash]

I understand. That was my point: genes just don't disappear and nobody is certain what coloring, looks etc the child will have. Of course, there is genetics math (don't know how it is cold in English) when you playing can solve a riddle to know what percentage of children will have blue eyes, or blond hair or any other feature, but it is really a unexpectedly shuffled deck- you just don't know what cards you will get.

According to the 'law of genetics', Stark genes should be dominant in comparison to the both Targs and Tully. IIRC Targ genes were never strong comparing with the other Westerosi families'.

On the other hand, it is interesting that most children in the series (in different families) got more of their mothers' genes and looks: Catelyne's, Elia's, if R+L=J, Lyanna's; well Cersei is not exactly the right example, but still. The permanent exception is Robert Baratheon: all his (16) children got his look; probably, the same with his brothers' children.

I think genetics as we understand it are not the factor in Martins world - the only reason all Robert's bastards are looking like him/have his coloring is to enable a proof of infidelity on the part of Cercei because they do not have CSI or DNK analisys in Westeros.

[Gala]

I think genetics as we understand it are not the factor in Martins world - the only reason all Robert's bastards are looking like him/have his coloring is to enable a proof of infidelity on the part of Cercei because they do not have CSI or DNK analisys in Westeros.

I don't doubt that they don't have labs ;)

Earlier I've already said actually the same: it could be just the author's 'mistake' (genetics server its purpose in the book. but didn't really match the real world)

[Ygrain]

Funny, I would have sworn I entered a post here. - Clever me, to type walls of text in the editor first :-), so here we go again:

I understand. That was my point: genes just don't disappear and nobody is certain what coloring, looks etc the child will have. Of course, there is genetics math (don't know how it is cold in English) when you playing can solve a riddle to know what percentage of children will have blue eyes, or blond hair or any other feature, but it is really a unexpectedly shuffled deck- you just don't know what cards you will get.

According to the 'law of genetics', Stark genes should be dominant in comparison to the both Targs and Tully. IIRC Targ genes were never strong comparing with the other Westerosi families'.

On the other hand, it is interesting that most children in the series (in different families) got more of their mothers' genes and looks: Catelyne's, Elia's, if R+L=J, Lyanna's; well Cersei is not exactly the right example, but still. The permanent exception is Robert Baratheon: all his (16) children got his look; probably, the same with his brothers' children.

I should probably state in the first place that I'm no expert in genetics, I just find the topic interesting and read something here and there.

The example above was a simplified model, but since I don't think GRRM is an expert, either, it should probably do. Let's take a look:

The fact that Ned's hair is brown (dominant variation of the gene, marked "A") does not really matter as long as there was at least one blonde ancestor in his line whose variant (recessive, marked "a") was passed along the line, even though the trait was not expressed, resulting in Ned's own gene combination being Aa (brown overrides blonde but blonde can still be passed on). When he marries Catelyn, your shuffled deck comes with four children inheriting the recessive "a" variant and only Arya the dominant "A". The usual Stark colouring is thus still dominant but it allows other variants to become manifest, and statistics is a bitch.

Now, Robert with his black hair. His own genetic makeup is definitely AA, i.e. both variants of the gene are dominant. He tends to prefer light-haired women, whose genes are composed of recessive variants. Their offspring then invariably inherit the Aa combination, and are all blackhaired (but able to pass on the light colour to their own offspring). His blue eyes are the other case - aa combination. However, light-haired women tend to have light eyes, as well, and so the chance of offspring having blue eyes is still quite high (but eye colour seems to be a pretty complicated matter and genetics here bends to the plot, I guess)

Rhaegar and Elia:

Targ features seem to be recessive, and maintained due to the interbreeding, so Rhaegar's combination is aa, and so he passes on just the "a" variant. Dark-haired and dark-eyed Elia definitely possesses one A variant, but due to a Targ ancestor, it is quite possible that the other variant in her pair is also a recessive "a" (hm, just realized why English goes with marking "b"instead of "a". Never mind), so her combination is Aa, which again perfectly allows dark-haired Rhaenys and silver-haired Aegon.

Now, the real-world genetics seems a bit more complex, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hair_colour, but I still think that in Ursa's family, the dominant variant was not passed on and the family will continue as blonde. As for the whole set of racial features, that's a result of many genes and combinations, and the outcome is really unpredictable, at least with the current state of knowledge.

[Bluefyre]

Funny, I would have sworn I entered a post here. - Clever me, to type walls of text in the editor first :-), so here we go again:

I should probably state in the first place that I'm no expert in genetics, I just find the topic interesting and read something here and there.

The example above was a simplified model, but since I don't think GRRM is an expert, either, it should probably do. Let's take a look:

The fact that Ned's hair is brown (dominant variation of the gene, marked "A") does not really matter as long as there was at least one blonde ancestor in his line whose variant (recessive, marked "a") was passed along the line, even though the trait was not expressed, resulting in Ned's own gene combination being Aa (brown overrides blonde but blonde can still be passed on). When he marries Catelyn, your shuffled deck comes with four children inheriting the recessive "a" variant and only Arya the dominant "A". The usual Stark colouring is thus still dominant but it allows other variants to become manifest, and statistics is a bitch.

Now, Robert with his black hair. His own genetic makeup is definitely AA, i.e. both variants of the gene are dominant. He tends to prefer light-haired women, whose genes are composed of recessive variants. Their offspring then invariably inherit the Aa combination, and are all blackhaired (but able to pass on the light colour to their own offspring). His blue eyes are the other case - aa combination. However, light-haired women tend to have light eyes, as well, and so the chance of offspring having blue eyes is still quite high (but eye colour seems to be a pretty complicated matter and genetics here bends to the plot, I guess)

Rhaegar and Elia:

Targ features seem to be recessive, and maintained due to the interbreeding, so Rhaegar's combination is aa, and so he passes on just the "a" variant. Dark-haired and dark-eyed Elia definitely possesses one A variant, but due to a Targ ancestor, it is quite possible that the other variant in her pair is also a recessive "a" (hm, just realized why English goes with marking "b"instead of "a". Never mind), so her combination is Aa, which again perfectly allows dark-haired Rhaenys and silver-haired Aegon.

Now, the real-world genetics seems a bit more complex, http://en.wikipedia....iki/Hair_colour, but I still think that in Ursa's family, the dominant variant was not passed on and the family will continue as blonde. As for the whole set of racial features, that's a result of many genes and combinations, and the outcome is really unpredictable, at least with the current state of knowledge.

Brilliantly explained, Ygrain! I totally agree.

And now sneakily returning this genetics lecture to my favourite subject: "Aegon" probably is a Blackfyre and not Rhaegar's kid. All other arguments aside (to be read in many other threads) and relating to the genetical aspect: Aegon's blueish-purple eyes may be a Blackfyre trait, considering the last published Dunk and Egg story. A friendly and gallant personality, which however also has a rather brash, hot-headed, overconfident side to it, might also be a heritable Blackfyre trait. The Blackfyres have a reputation as great warriors, but if you go over their recorded exploits in the ASOIAF and Dunk&Egg stories, they never seemed to have accomplished a whole lot...

As for Jon: Rheagar's traits seem pretty recessive anyhow. Rhaenys was a Dornish-type girl, so she took after her mother Elia. Baby Aegon's features were never described in detail as far as I recall. Jon's Starkish features therefore do not exclude Jon from having a Targ father at all. It just means that even if Jon's father indeed was Rheagar and his mother was Lyanna, Lyanna's Starkish alleles for hair and eye colour were dominant.

BTW, the circumstantial evidence for Jon being Rheagar's git is pretty impressive. Ned's memories and guilt, his high regards for Rhaegar, his promise to Lyanna, combined with his and Howland Reed's efforts to keep Jon's true identity hidden, and probably the strongest clue of them all: the 3 Kingsguard, including Arthur Dayne, Rhaegar's closest friend, staying put at the Tower of Joy with Lyanna after Rhaegar's and Aerys' deaths. This indeed must be taken as that (baby) Jon is Rheagar's and Lyanna's legit offspring.

Jon therefore probably also is Lyanna's son. An extra argument for this: from all his "siblings" (besides Robb, who was about the same age) at Winterfell, Jon took mostly to Arya, the most Starkish one of Ned and Cat's kids. That may be explained by an adverse gut feeling towards his Tullyish Stark half-siblings, also because of Cat's treatment of him - although his friendship with Robb is an argument against this, and AGOT never mentions any resentful memories in Jon's POV chapters towards Sansa, Bran, or Rickon. But it also migh be because Arya (who is in some passages described as being very much alike Lyanna) linked Jon to his mom on a subconcious level.

[Peach Fuzz]

Its got to be R + L = J ...Ned seemed deliberatly evasive to Robert when asked about Jons parentage. I think it was hard yet easy for Ned to lie about Jon being Wyllas son for the fact he was an honourable man and lying wouldnt come easy, then the fact thjis is Lord Stark were talking about if he says wyllas the mother would you disprove him?

Then we have Rhaegar who from all sources(but robert) is a man who is very unlikley to partake in kidnapp and rape. the only thing that bothers me is how obvious it seems and a man like GRRM is a bastard for letting you think you no whats going on then smashes you in the face with a complete opposite of what you thought but then again he planned only three books maybe he revealed to much in the first thinking this ll be wrapped up in two more but as te story s developed he s had to make it more ambiguous.

[Thoheeks Bili]

This. And also Jon was born at the time of the sack of KL, or possibly later, when Aerys was already dead.

Problem with your explanation is that Rheagar died before Aerys....however, with the 3 kingsguard(including the lord commander of them) guarding the ToJ, i suspect that THEY considered Rheagar the King and were "in on" his designs to change things once the rebellion was put down(so they assumed), thus, they hung around the Toj as the last legitimate living child of Rheagars loins was within(so they thought).

My thoughts about it anyways.

[Magg the Mighty]

Its got to be R + L = J ...Ned seemed deliberatly evasive to Robert when asked about Jons parentage. I think it was hard yet easy for Ned to lie about Jon being Wyllas son for the fact he was an honourable man and lying wouldnt come easy, then the fact thjis is Lord Stark were talking about if he says wyllas the mother would you disprove him?

I see a lot of people asking, "But why would an honourable man like Ned lie if Jon wasn't his son?" Well, we've seen exactly how psychotic Robert was about stamping out the Targaryen line, how he especially loathed Rhaegar ("I kill him every night in my dreams"), and how much he loved Lyanna. If he caught even the sneakingest suspicion that Lyanna birthed Rhaegar's son -- and likely willingly at that -- Jon would have been murdered in his cradle faster than you can say The Mountain That Rides. To protect his sister's memory, to protect his nephew and to protect Robert from himself, Ned claimed Jon as his own despite the blow to his own honour.

It doesn't necessarily take a king to legitimize a bastard. The noble father can claim the child as "natural offspring", thus raising them from the rank of bastard. See Petyr Baelish and Sansa's assumed identity of Alayne Stone. She isn't claimed as his bastard, but his "natural daughter", which neatly explains her noble mannerisms.

[imany]

Natural son/daughter is a nicer way of saying bastard.

[Noelle Snow]

Natural offspring is just another way to say bastard. One is just the more PC term.

the only thing that bothers me is how obvious it seems and a man like GRRM is a bastard for letting you think you no whats going on then smashes you in the face with a complete opposite of what you thought but then again he planned only three books maybe he revealed to much in the first thinking this ll be wrapped up in two more but as te story s developed he s had to make it more ambiguous.

I keep seeing people say this as an argument against R+L=J but honestly, it's not all that obvious at all for most readers. Yes, there are some who I'm sure picked up on it on the first reading but I'd wager the majority of readers didn't connect the dots until either seeing the theory spelled out for them (whether it be here, Tower of the Hand or elsewhere) or picking up the clues on re-reads of the books. I don't think this theory is obvious at all until you know about it. Then it seems clear as day.