R+L=J v.21

[Dragonfish]

@BuriedTreasure--

Here's my main issue with your interpretation: the Kingsguard do not swear an oath to never flee. Well, that's not entirely correct: they do swear to never flee when defending the King from attack (remember how incensed Cersei was at Ser Boros Blount for surrendering to the men Tyrion had sent to take Tommen?). But outside of that context, there's nothing to indicate that the Kingsguard never engage in tactical retreats when the situation calls for it. If they did, then I'd imagine the life of a Kingsguard would be pretty short. So, why then do they consider their refusal to flee to also be in compliance with their vow? I think the best explanation is that they are refusing to flee in the face of a potential threat to their King, who is in the tower with them. That's the only way I can make sense of their belief that they are both refusing to flee and adhering to their vow.

Edited for clarity.

[Buried Treasure]

The oaths a man swears do not cover all situations and we can't say that the kingsguard oath contained anything about what to do when the dynasty they are sworn to is overthrown. Robert's victory has torn up the rulebook and different members of the kingsguard respond by making different choices; 'our knees do not easily bend' vs. Barristan's choice to kneel to the new king.

The response they give to Ned's question of why they are not with Viserys also involves Ser Willem Darry:

'Sir Willem is a good man and true ... But not of the Kingsguard ... The Kingsguard does not flee ... Then or now'

They are saying they would not make the same choice as Ser Willem. But Ser Willem is fled into exile to guard the prince he believes to be the Targaryen heir - which is what your theory says is the correct thing to do! If Jon is legitimate then Darry has the wrong heir, but he couldn't know that. The kingsguard don't say 'Ser Willem is mistaken' they say he does not think like a Kingsguard - implying that if they had been in Darry's shoes with his knowledge of the situation they would not have made the same choice.

[Teal'c]

I agree, but I reckon Wylla and the fisher woman may be the same person. Wylla is a name associated with that area (Wylla Manderley, for example), it doesn't seem to be a Dornish name. I think Wylla might have a far more interesting history, involving Ned, than is now generally thought

I think she is the same Wylla also, and I'll also bet she has webbed fingers, which Jon does not have.

[Dragonfish]

The oaths a man swears do not cover all situations

Sure they do. Or at least, they do for men who are as rigid about their oaths as these three Kingsguard were. Their job is to defend the king at all costs, even their lives. No exceptions. So the question is, who is the king they must protect? It clearly isn't Robert, given that they call him "usurper" in Ned's dream. It can't be Viserys, because they don't bother going to him, and don't seem to care that he lacks Kingsguard protection. So who is it? According to your interpretation, it would be no one. I might accept that, if it weren't for the fact that they still believe they are following their oath right now. And since I can't for the life of me imagine how defending a non-descript locale is supposed to be in accordance with their oath under any circumstance, I have to figure they are there because their king is there.

The response they give to Ned's question of why they are not with Viserys also involves Ser Willem Darry:

'Sir Willem is a good man and true ... But not of the Kingsguard ... The Kingsguard does not flee ... Then or now'

They are saying they would not make the same choice as Ser Willem. But Ser Willem is fled into exile to guard the prince he believes to be the Targaryen heir - which is what your theory says is the correct thing to do! If Jon is legitimate then Darry has the wrong heir, but he couldn't know that. The kingsguard don't say 'Ser Willem is mistaken' they say he does not think like a Kingsguard - implying that if they had been in Darry's shoes with his knowledge of the situation they would not have made the same choice.

I don't see anything in that quote implying that the Kingsguard are talking about the choice they would make in Ser Willem Darry's shoes. What I see is them saying, "Ser Willem is a good man and true, but we are of the Kingsguard, and we do not flee because we swore an oath" (implication: we do not flee from protecting our king). In other words, they are simply saying that it is not an option for them to flee like Ser Willem did, because they know the king is still in mainland Westeros.

[zzzNitro]

The oaths a man swears do not cover all situations and we can't say that the kingsguard oath contained anything about what to do when the dynasty they are sworn to is overthrown. Robert's victory has torn up the rulebook and different members of the kingsguard respond by making different choices; 'our knees do not easily bend' vs. Barristan's choice to kneel to the new king.

The response they give to Ned's question of why they are not with Viserys also involves Ser Willem Darry:

'Sir Willem is a good man and true ... But not of the Kingsguard ... The Kingsguard does not flee ... Then or now'

They are saying they would not make the same choice as Ser Willem. But Ser Willem is fled into exile to guard the prince he believes to be the Targaryen heir - which is what your theory says is the correct thing to do! If Jon is legitimate then Darry has the wrong heir, but he couldn't know that. The kingsguard don't say 'Ser Willem is mistaken' they say he does not think like a Kingsguard - implying that if they had been in Darry's shoes with his knowledge of the situation they would not have made the same choice.

I remeber reading in one of Barristan POV (or maybe it's was a Dany chapter, not really sure right now) in which he (Barristan) said something like "the KG knows all the king's secrets" or something along those lines.

I know that given the depth and seriousness this topic has, saying it like this sounds like a rumour or at least amteur-ish, but if someone could point out which chapter and how the line goes I'd be eternally gratefull =)

Anyways, I think that the KG knowledge about the heir can not be questioned, the Lord freakin' Commander was there! if that doesn't scream "a king is hidding here" I don't know what it is saying.

BTW, The timeline for the KG during the war, especifically(sp?) for the LC, would be like this:

Judgement by trial of Rickard at KL, blank, End of the war at ToJ- or is there something more elaborated?

[corbon]

sorry, pointless post, misinterpreted something

[zzzNitro]

By the way, in a recent interview GRRM said that "Jon's mommy" will be revealed(sp?) in the coming books( my bet is on aDoS), personally I don't see any need for her to be revealed(sp?) if she's already been mentioned, if you know what I mean.

The exact quote on that is "I make no comment on that, no comments on Jon Snow's mommy, you have you keep reading for that"

Here's the link

I bet most of the people that keeps track on the news links of this page already saw it, but still. 21:08 for the lazy guys that just wanna hear him say it.

[Red Raven]

Officially Wylla and Ashara were both presented in the books as possibly being Jon's mommy. Even if he isn't Lyanna's son (and I think he is) and his mother is one of the other two, GRRM didn't hint at which one it was and could reasonably be "revealed" in a later book.

That said, in an old interview:

Q:Since all of their mothers died, who gave Jon Snow, Daenerys Targaryen and Tyrion Lannister their names?

GRRM: Mothers can name a child before birth, or during, or after, even while they are dying. Dany was most like named by her mother, Tyrion by his father, Jon by Ned.

Note he didn't say, "Tyrion and Jon by their fathers." Hmmm... I find that more interesting.

[zzzNitro]

True, it is indeed interesting, but what I was hinting at is the fact that he said "you have to keep reading" as in "she hasn't appeared yet but she will" which to me says clearly as day that none of the mentioned in the book can be Jon's mommy, but one that hasn't appeared, but yeah, it could be just me reading waaay too much into it, who knows maybe he will write that Wylla was his mother all along.

[corbon]

True, it is indeed interesting, but what I was hinting at is the fact that he said "you have to keep reading" as in "she hasn't appeared yet but she will" which to me says clearly as day that none of the mentioned in the book can be Jon's mommy, but one that hasn't appeared, but yeah, it could be just me reading waaay too much into it, who knows maybe he will write that Wylla was his mother all along.

It does not even suggest, let alone define, that Jon's mother has not yet been mentioned. That would be an introduction (new character/idea/mother) not a revelation. Revelation is when hidden things (ie already there, but obscured), are uncovered.

[Goreshank]

I was wondering this morning while brushing my teeth if Ser Barristan knows the truth of Rhaegar and Lyanna? He wasn't at the Tower of Joy with the other Kingsguard, but he was a knight of the Kingsguard and knew Rhaegar well. I mean he is sworn to keep his kings' secrets, so it isn't unlikely that he would let this sort of information go without a really good reason. Just a thought.

[Alia of the knife]

He knows about Rhaegar and Lyanna, ("Prince Rhaegar loved his Lady Lyanna and thousands died for it"), so he likley knows there was a relationship, and given he compares that love, (as well as others in Targaryen History), to a "slow poison," probably didn't appove, which is why he wonders what Dany will with Daario.

Selmy is a duty man, and a "mud" man.

However, he doesn't know about Jon, or else he might have taken up his cause finally, instead of Dany's.

[Goreshank]

Ah yes, I suppose you are right. So much for toothbrush wisdom haha.

[Vandalism]

So, first post in this thread.

The main reasoning a guy on YouTube used to persuade me about the possibility of Rhaegar and Lyanna being Jon's parents was pretty logical, and it'll take a nice reasonable discussion in this thread to change my opinion.

I believe that Rhaegar and Lyanna were Jon's parents. We know that 3 Kingsguard knights were present with Rhaegar and Lyanna.at the Tower of Joy when Ned and his 6 swordsmen accosted them. Why else would the Kingsguard be present there, if not to be defending the Targaryen heir to Westeros? Aerys and Rhaenys were dead, and Rhaegar had gone off to fight Robert Baratheon.

Also, it's said that Lyanna actually did love Rhaegar and not Robert. We read in the first book that Ned remembered Lyanna as saying that Robert couldn't be expected to stay loyal and sexually clean. We also know that Rhaegar was a gentle being with love for beauty and other qualities which women desired.

So, I believe that Lyanna died after giving birth to Jon, and made Ned promise not to tell anybody that Jon was hers. So, Ned told Catelyn that he had given birth to a bastard.

That's it. On a side-note, I'd really like this theory to be true. It is really a wonderful surprise for anyone and would give Ned's mysterious side a whole new dimension. It would make up for something that this series has lacked so far: deep investigation into the personal struggles of the characters.

[Thoheeks Bili]

So, first post in this thread.

The main reasoning a guy on YouTube used to persuade me about the possibility of Rhaegar and Lyanna being Jon's parents was pretty logical, and it'll take a nice reasonable discussion in this thread to change my opinion.

I believe that Rhaegar and Lyanna were Jon's parents. We know that 3 Kingsguard knights were present with Rhaegar and Lyanna.at the Tower of Joy when Ned and his 6 swordsmen accosted them. Why else would the Kingsguard be present there, if not to be defending the Targaryen heir to Westeros? Aerys and Rhaenys were dead, and Rhaegar had gone off to fight Robert Baratheon.

Also, it's said that Lyanna actually did love Rhaegar and not Robert. We read in the first book that Ned remembered Lyanna as saying that Robert couldn't be expected to stay loyal and sexually clean. We also know that Rhaegar was a gentle being with love for beauty and other qualities which women desired.

So, I believe that Lyanna died after giving birth to Jon, and made Ned promise not to tell anybody that Jon was hers. So, Ned told Catelyn that he had given birth to a bastard.

That's it. On a side-note, I'd really like this theory to be true. It is really a wonderful surprise for anyone and would give Ned's mysterious side a whole new dimension. It would make up for something that this series has lacked so far: deep investigation into the personal struggles of the characters.

THAT would be quite the trick!!! :cool4:

[Falrinn]

I was wondering this morning while brushing my teeth if Ser Barristan knows the truth of Rhaegar and Lyanna? He wasn't at the Tower of Joy with the other Kingsguard, but he was a knight of the Kingsguard and knew Rhaegar well. I mean he is sworn to keep his kings' secrets, so it isn't unlikely that he would let this sort of information go without a really good reason. Just a thought.

That is interesting...

However, chances are he only knows Lyanna was pregnant with Rhaegar's child. By the time Jon was actually born, Targeryan lines of communication had completely broken down and he would have no way of even knowing if a live birth had taken place. Ned later appearing with a "bastard son" might of been suspicious, but it's unlikely Barristan realized just how honorable-to-a-fault Ned really was at the time (and would later write it off as the actions of a less disciplined, younger man), and Jon's overwhelmingly Stark appearance doesn't exactly raise suspicion of Targeryan roots.

[Lady Octarina]

He knows about Rhaegar and Lyanna, ("Prince Rhaegar loved his Lady Lyanna and thousands died for it"), so he likley knows there was a relationship, and given he compares that love, (as well as others in Targaryen History), to a "slow poison," probably didn't appove, which is why he wonders what Dany will with Daario.

Selmy is a duty man, and a "mud" man.

However, he doesn't know about Jon, or else he might have taken up his cause finally, instead of Dany's.

Would he take Jon's cause, even if he knew who he was? Jon had taken the black by the time Joffrey fired Barristan, I doubt he would have gone to the Wall to try and persuade him to leave it lol

But the thing is, Barristan went to Winterfell with Robert, didn't he? Wouldn't he have shown some interest in Jon while there, had he known who he was (if he was there, I really don't remember)?

[Sasha Steelsong]

Would he take Jon's cause, even if he knew who he was? Jon had taken the black by the time Joffrey fired Barristan, I doubt he would have gone to the Wall to try and persuade him to leave it lol

But the thing is, Barristan went to Winterfell with Robert, didn't he? Wouldn't he have shown some interest in Jon while there, had he known who he was (if he was there, I really don't remember)?

Actually I think he was one of the two who met them on the road after they left, I vaguely remember Sansa IDing him while being all embarassed in front of the road-court...don't quote me though cause I'm parted from my GOT at the moment.

[Lady Octarina]

Actually I think he was one of the two who met them on the road after they left, I vaguely remember Sansa IDing him while being all embarassed in front of the road-court...don't quote me though cause I'm parted from my GOT at the moment.

Well, either way points to his not knowing about Jon, even if your memory is as bad as mine xD If he was in Winterfell, his not paying any attention to Jon shows that he didn't know who he boy was. If he wasn't, then Martin needed him to be as far from Jon as possible because he could see something of Rhaegar in him - or not, since no one would really pay attention to a bastard.

[Alia of the knife]

Would he take Jon's cause, even if he knew who he was? Jon had taken the black by the time Joffrey fired Barristan, I doubt he would have gone to the Wall to try and persuade him to leave it lol

But the thing is, Barristan went to Winterfell with Robert, didn't he? Wouldn't he have shown some interest in Jon while there, had he known who he was (if he was there, I really don't remember)?

Yes, he knew of Jon before he took his vows, but just thought he was what he was- Neds bastard.

I don't know if Selmy was with them at Winterfell, but he could have been since he is supposed to be with the King, unless they left him in charge at KL.

Then, when Ned came to KL, he had already sent Jon on his way to the Wall.