R+L=J v.21

[Lady Octarina]

Yes, Jon is born around the same time as the sack, give or take a few weeks or so. Robb is claimed to be older, though it seems unlikely, but Jon cannot be very much older (if any) as the difference between, say, a 6 month old baby and a 3 month old baby is pretty obvious.

Yes, but how long was it between the sack of KL and Ned's arrival at the ToJ? Did he break the siege to Storm's End before or after going to KL? Because, until I started discussing these theories here, I always assumed he had arrived at the ToJ around the time Lyanna was giving birth to Jon, that she died only a few hours or days from his birth. But this timeline contradicts that, and I remember someone suggested on this thread (or the previous) that she could have died from some kind of post-pregnancy fever, but how many months could that last? Because it seems to be this timeline suggests Ned only arrived at the ToJ when Jon was about a month and a half, two-months old. O.o

[Screaming Knight]

Yes, but how long was it between the sack of KL and Ned's arrival at the ToJ? Did he break the siege to Storm's End before or after going to KL? Because, until I started discussing these theories here, I always assumed he had arrived at the ToJ around the time Lyanna was giving birth to Jon, that she died only a few hours or days from his birth. But this timeline contradicts that, and I remember someone suggested on this thread (or the previous) that she could have died from some kind of post-pregnancy fever, but how many months could that last? Because it seems to be this timeline suggests Ned only arrived at the ToJ when Jon was about a month and a half, two-months old. O.o

I always thought he lifted the siege after the sack of KL, going off of the order in which Ned states the events that he thought he would've seen the KG in his dream, and that there is no mention of stannis being in KL during or after the sack. It doesn't exactly mean that is how it definitely happened. I assume all of the battles would've been fought and then the siege would've been lifted so that there would be less resistance from the loyalists once it seemed the cause was lost.

[Dragonfish]

Brandon was at Riverrun when he got the news. Hoster Tully counselled him not to go off to KL and called him a "gallant fool" or something like that.

No, Brandon was on his way to Riverrun when he got the news, at which point he presumably changed course for King's Landing. Hoster Tully called him a "gallant fool" when he'd received word of what he'd done.

The Rebellion is 'about a year' depending on when you take it's start time (Jon Arryn calls his banners?) and when you take its end time (the sack?)

We know the Sack is the end point for the "close to a year" timeline of the war, but as you point out, we don't know when the beginning of the war is technically dated. I personally put at the point when Jon Arryn calls his banners, since that's when the fighting first began.

[Ygrain]

The siege of Storm's End was definitely lifted after the sack of KL, and Ned went to ToJ right after that. I vaguely recall that he managed to end the siege without a fight, so the timeline would probably consist just of travel times - and that part when Ned travels to ToJ with only a small company could be rather quick, I think.

Now, if Lyanna died of puerperal fever, my estimate is that she could linger for maximum 1-2 weeks after the birth. If she contracted some disease unrelated to childbirth, there is no telling. It is clearly stated, though, that she had fever, and since the bed of blood is mentioned simultaneously, I think that complicated delivery resulting in infection is quite a safe bet as a cause of death.

[Independent George]

I don't think Robb's age matters much; all we know about Jon's age relative to Robb is that they're "of a same age". I interpret that to mean they're within six months of each other, which gives us plenty of leeway on the timeline.

The bigger issue is Dany. According to Jaime's POV, Dany was conceived very shortly before the sack of King's Landing, when Aerys raped Rhaella on the night he burned his previous Hand. If Jon was born shortly before Ned's arrival at the TOJ, and Dany is 8 months younger than Jon, that means Ned had roughly a month to get from King's Landing, to Storm's End, and then back to the Tower of Joy. I'm not good enough with Westeros geography to know how viable that is.

ETA: if we add 2 weeks for post-partem infection, and another 1-2 weeks to Dany's birth for a late, difficult pregnancy, maybe we can stretch that window to two months, which is certainly enough time.

[Sasha Steelsong]

Yes, but how long was it between the sack of KL and Ned's arrival at the ToJ? Did he break the siege to Storm's End before or after going to KL? Because, until I started discussing these theories here, I always assumed he had arrived at the ToJ around the time Lyanna was giving birth to Jon, that she died only a few hours or days from his birth. But this timeline contradicts that, and I remember someone suggested on this thread (or the previous) that she could have died from some kind of post-pregnancy fever, but how many months could that last? Because it seems to be this timeline suggests Ned only arrived at the ToJ when Jon was about a month and a half, two-months old. O.o

After a bit of internet flipping it seems as if she could have lingered for weeks with a fever of the "childbed fever" type as it is basically a sepsis infection that presents within the first week or so after birth (as opposed to the general weakening that some women can experience where they survive childbirth but barely and can't have more - i.e. Elia). Then I would imagine it is a matter of time but from historical accounts hanging on for a week or two before dying doesn't seem that uncommon (particularly if she was healthy before it might just take time for the infection to weaken her before it starts to win out). Add to that the imprecision of Jon's birthdate (around the time of the sack suggest to me at least two weeks on either side), that the seige at Storm's End basically lifted with Ned's arrival and travel time between anywhere it sounds as if Ned would have arrived at the TOJ about a month and some change after the sack, which would work with the timeline.

Being the about the same age as Robb suggests about a two month window (and that is being generous) to work with on the Winterfell side of things as well, as a 6 month old looks/is nothing like 10 month old or a 1-yr old. The story was that Ned fathered a bastard after his wedding, it wouldn't have held if Jon looked several months older than Robb who according to the bastard story would have to have been older since he was conceived in the two weeks Ned spent at Riverrun after the wedding (which is why I tend to think that Jon was born a couple weeks after the sack - as that would put him more in line with the time that Robb was born). Too many developmental changes happen in the first year for there to have been more time between Robb and Jon (assuming both kids are fed well and taken care of). Given that we know that Robb arrived in Winterfell in swaddling clothes he couldn't have been more than a few months old himself, which (again taking travel into account) suggests that Jon could not have been more than two months old when he left the south since Ned beat Catelyn there.

[corbon]

No, Brandon was on his way to Riverrun when he got the news, at which point he presumably changed course for King's Landing. Hoster Tully called him a "gallant fool" when he'd received word of what he'd done.

Quite correct, my mistake.

ETA: Apologies too to Arya Targaryen for falsely correcting her.

[Rhaegar Targaryen's Ghost]

i love how this topic stretches 17 pages here, and back like 400 other pages.. crazy.

[Screaming Knight]

i love how this topic stretches 17 pages here, and back like 400 other pages.. crazy.

You could end it right now by telling us what happened. Bein Rhaegars ghost and all.

[Independent George]

You could end it right now by telling us what happened. Bein Rhaegars ghost and all.

I saw Rashomon. Ghosts can't be trusted.

[Merman of Manderly]

I'm all for the R+L= J theory!! And I'm quite pleased that I came to the conclusion myself :) I have a feeling that the fact that Edric Dayne and Jon Snow were milk brothers will shed some more light on the situation... There's something mysterious going on there... Can't wait to find out the truth!

[Screaming Knight]

I saw Rashomon. Ghosts can't be trusted.

Then howland reed would have to be the woodcutter and we need to hear it from his POV.

[trins]

I don't know if this question has been asked or covered, but OK lets say that Lyanna and Rhaegar did get married secretly and he hid her in the tower of joy, and everything ensued. Would their marriage be considered legal? I know that incest among the Targaryans were "normal" but was polygamy? It hadn't been done since the first conquest in I remember correctly.

[Lady Octarina]

I don't know if this question has been asked or covered, but OK lets say that Lyanna and Rhaegar did get married secretly and he hid her in the tower of joy, and everything ensued. Would their marriage be considered legal? I know that incest among the Targaryans were "normal" but was polygamy? It hadn't been done since the first conquest in I remember correctly.

I don't think there was any law against it, it simply stopped being practiced. I doubt a septon performed the ceremony, but if it was made in a weirwood, from what I get it's much more simple, easily made, and it's just as valid, so... Well, and the kingsguard seemed to believe that baby was their rightful king, so at least to them it was legal - and if it was legal to those guys, I believe it would probably be to the rest of Westeros.

[trins]

I don't think there was any law against it, it simply stopped being practiced. I doubt a septon performed the ceremony, but if it was made in a weirwood, from what I get it's much more simple, easily made, and it's just as valid, so... Well, and the kingsguard seemed to believe that baby was their rightful king, so at least to them it was legal - and if it was legal to those guys, I believe it would probably be to the rest of Westeros.

How do we know that the kingsguard were convinced of the marriage and legitimacy of the baby as a possible heir? What if it was simply that Rhaegar commanded them to protect Lyanna and Jon. And why would all of the 'best" kingsguard knights ( best ones IMO) stay with Lyanna and Jon, and not off protecting the actual heir - Aegon?

I know we don't have much info, but that part always bothers me is like why were they off protecting Lyanna and Jon.. --> oh maybe Rhaegar only spared Dayne and the others because Rhaegar believed that the Lannisters had enough manpower and capabilities to protect Aegon, Rhaenys and Elia. W/E still off putting to keep all his most trusted knights with Lyanna and Jon...

Edit: LOL Spelling suggested by Dragon Fish. I forget words and other things too - its just meee.

[The guy from the Vale]

How do we know that the kingsguard were convinced of the marriage and legitimacy of the baby as a possible heir? What if it was simply that Rhaegar commanded them to protect Lyanna and Jon. And why would all of the 'best" kingsguard knights ( best ones IMO) stay with Lyanna and Jon, and not off protecting the actual heir - Aegon?

I know we don't have much info, but that part always bothers me is like why were they off protecting Lyanna and Jon.. --> oh maybe Rhaegar only spared Dayne and the others because Rhaegar believed that the Lannisters had enough manpower and capabilities to protect Aegon, Rhaenys and Elia. W/E still off pudding to keep all his most trusted knights with Lyanna and Jon...

We know because they tell us. The most important vow for the KG is protecting the king. Every other obligation comes after that. So when Ned tells them Viserys is in Dragonstone with Willem Darry, they don't leave, but state that the KG does keep their vows: protecting the rightful king, Rhaegar's and Lyanna's son. Aegon would indeed be king before Jon, but he is assumed dead at that point, killed by the Mountain. And indeed, there are reasons to assume Young Griff isn't Aegon Targaryen, sixth of his name, but rather Aegon Blackfyre-Mopatis...

Also, there was one member of the KG with Aerys during the Sack, Ser Jaime Lannister. Noone knew he'd become the Kingslayer, and the other KG might have been looking for Rhaegar, or might even have been involved in Rhaegar's plans to topple Aerys.

[Lady Octarina]

How do we know that the kingsguard were convinced of the marriage and legitimacy of the baby as a possible heir? What if it was simply that Rhaegar commanded them to protect Lyanna and Jon. And why would all of the 'best" kingsguard knights ( best ones IMO) stay with Lyanna and Jon, and not off protecting the actual heir - Aegon?

I know we don't have much info, but that part always bothers me is like why were they off protecting Lyanna and Jon.. --> oh maybe Rhaegar only spared Dayne and the others because Rhaegar believed that the Lannisters had enough manpower and capabilities to protect Aegon, Rhaenys and Elia. W/E still off pudding to keep all his most trusted knights with Lyanna and Jon...

He might have left the best KG with them because somewhere along the way he got to the conclusion that his child with Lyanna would be the one from the prophecies, not Aegon. Or he might have feared that Robert's men found the Tower, so he left his best warriors there.

Anyway, the fact remains that the KG stayed there, and their primary obligation is not simply to obey the king, but to protect him. There were people enough in KG to protect Aerys and Aegon, but Rhaegar's second heir would be unprotected. That's why they stayed, I think. Not to mention that, by the time Ned arrived there, they were all dead, and yet the KG didn't go for Viserys. I really don't see any other explanation for this, but the fact that the baby was the rightful heir, first in line to the Throne, and those 3 KG knew it.

[Dragonfish]

How do we know that the kingsguard were convinced of the marriage and legitimacy of the baby as a possible heir? What if it was simply that Rhaegar commanded them to protect Lyanna and Jon. And why would all of the 'best" kingsguard knights ( best ones IMO) stay with Lyanna and Jon, and not off protecting the actual heir - Aegon?

I know we don't have much info, but that part always bothers me is like why were they off protecting Lyanna and Jon.. --> oh maybe Rhaegar only spared Dayne and the others because Rhaegar believed that the Lannisters had enough manpower and capabilities to protect Aegon, Rhaenys and Elia. W/E still off pudding to keep all his most trusted knights with Lyanna and Jon...

Two things:

1) There is precedent for polygamy among Targaryens, and not just with Aegon the Conqueror and his sisters. For example, Maegor the Cruel had eight or nine wives, some of them from outside House Targaryen. George has also said that there could have been some later examples as well.

2) In all likelihood, the Kingsguard were initially at the ToJ simply because Aerys or Rhaegar ordered them there (at the time, Aerys would have had four Kingsguard knights defending him, so the three who were at the ToJ would not be leaving the king completely undefended). What people on this board argue over is why the Kingsguard stayed at the ToJ after Aerys, Rhaegar, and Aegon were killed. At that point, their new king ought to have been Viserys, and he would have been holed away on Dragonstone without any Kingsguard to guard him. I and others on this board argue that at least one of the three remaining Kingsguard should have at least tried to reach Viserys, simply because it was their duty to do so. The fact that none of them did this says to me that they were staying at the ToJ because they were guarding the true heir.

Oh, and by the way, I don't normally correct people's spelling on this board if I can help it, but I think you should know that "off pudding" is actually spelled "off putting." Not trying to diss you or anything, I just think it would be a bit of useful info.

[trins]

lol I feel enlightened.

2) In all likelihood, the Kingsguard were initially at the ToJ simply because Aerys or Rhaegar ordered them there (at the time, Aerys would have had four Kingsguard knights defending him, so the three who were at the ToJ would not be leaving the king completely undefended). What people on this board argue over is why the Kingsguard stayed at the ToJ after Aerys, Rhaegar, and Aegon were killed. At that point, their new king ought to have been Viserys, and he would have been holed away on Dragonstone without any Kingsguard to guard him. I and others on this board argue that at least one of the three remaining Kingsguard should have at least tried to reach Viserys, simply because it was their duty to do so. The fact that none of them did this says to me that they were staying at the ToJ because they were guarding the true heir.

Then that would almost certainly mean Lyanna and Rhaegar had married.

@ Dragonfish

Nope, I don't feel dissed. I just type reaaallly badly...

[Buried Treasure]

We know because they tell us. The most important vow for the KG is protecting the king. Every other obligation comes after that. So when Ned tells them Viserys is in Dragonstone with Willem Darry, they don't leave, but state that the KG does keep their vows: protecting the rightful king, Rhaegar's and Lyanna's son. Aegon would indeed be king before Jon, but he is assumed dead at that point, killed by the Mountain.

I've never agreed with this interpretation. The reason they give for not going to Viserys is not that the KG stay with the rightful king, it is that 'the kingsuard do not flee.' But if their intention was to defeat Ned then flee with Jon that means the KG were lying - and that is not something I believe that these three men would do.

The kingsguard always protected the king, but that is when they has a king to protect. They were in an unprecedented situation as the Targ dynasty had been overthrown for the first time, and the next Targ heir was not going to be a king, he was going to be a prince in exile. That was the fate of Viserys (the widely acknowledged heir) and if the KG had taken (a legitimate) Jon from the ToJ it would have been his fate as well. The kingsguard could have taken Jon into exile - they could have even called him 'King Jon' instead of 'Prince Jon' - but he would have still not have been a king. And they did not choose exile because the kingsguard do not flee.

The whole conversation was about the kingsguard not the Targaryens . We find out that the kingsguard won't flee and they won't kneel. When your side has lost the war that leaves only one thing - die. Fighting Ned meant that they were allowed to die honourably, fighting an honourable foe, but the 7-3 odds meant it was obvious the 3 would die even before the fight began. If they had really wanted to survive / win the fight they would not have chosen to fight on the open ground, they could have used the defences of the tower, a tactic which is not dishonorable but does negate the advantage of a more numerous force.