R+L=J v.25

[Lady Tippy Wolfsbane]

it seems to me that what SFDanny is trying to say is that even though it might be morally right for high lords to turn against a mad king it is not legal, according to Westerosi laws of course. Which I think its a fair argument.

The thing is that not all legally right activity is morally right and that's where trouble begins.

It is truly complicated. I feel that a king should also take certain oaths, and if he fails to uphold those oaths his people should have the right to oust him! ^_^

What connection between house Baratheon and House Stark? Seriously, aside from Ned and Robert becoming friends as a result of them both spending time as wards of Lord Arryn I'm not really aware of any long history of between the two houses. For the most part the North seemed to stay well out of events south of the neck, for all the houses.

I'm also not talking about why in the past the Targs and the Starks may have not mingled. It is quite possible that warging had something to do with the distance in the past (though frankly it would only serve as a reason for the Targs to keep their distance from the Starks not the other way around as one would think that if they could warg a dragon they'd want to be close to try) but I agree that whatever the old reasons reasons were by Rickard's time they had been forgotten.

Which is why if Rickard did have southern ambitions (and we really don't know the scope of those, it could have been to overthrow the Targs, it could have just been to get more power over Westeros in general, it could have just been something that Lady Dustin heard and liked because it explained why she couldn't marry any of the Stark boys), he may have come around to supporting a Targ/Stark alliance as a way to acheive them. Nothing suggests he plotted quite like the Boleyns but if he became aware of feelings between Rhaegar and Lyanna, it is possible he used those to further his own southern ambitions. If his desire is to overthrow the Targs, having a half-Targ child as an achor for a claim wouldn't be all that bad, and said child also enhances connections with the south if that is just the ambition. Either way I don't think we can say definitively that Rickard would have been against Lyanna and Rhaegar since we don't know what his southern ambitions were. Nor can we say definitely that he didn't know about Rhaegar and Lyanna since Rickard could have been told and it would change nothing because it was Brandon who went to KL and regardless of what Rickard knew he still had to deal with the situtation in KL.

Most of my points regarding the relationship between the Starks and Baratheons are pure speculation on my part, so I will not debate that point. :)

Frankly, I feel it would also serve as a reason for the Starks to keep their distance from the Targaryens. If King Torrhen had not bent the knee to Aegon, and the Starks went against the Targs in an attempt to warg the dragons, the results could have been disastrous. I'm sure the Targs would have tried to wipe them out, since the wargs would have been a constant threat to their rule. King Torrhen bending the knee allowed for the houses to have a mutual respect for one another, since the Targs were unsure of the Starks abilities. ;)

I don't agree with Lord Rickard having "southern ambitions," but as you said we cannot know for sure. :unsure:

[geekmythologist]

It can be found here.

On one hand the mention of Targaryens and royal succession seems telling, on the other the "Luke Skywalker" thing is... confusing.

Of course this is Alfie "smoke pot erry day" Allen, if his sister's song is to be believed :P

Thanks for directing me to the interview. I didn't know he gave one and especially that he compared Jon to Luke Skywalker!!! So who's Luke?

The son of former Queen of Naboo and Republic Senator Padmé Amidala (Royal or important noblewoman aka Lyanna Stark) and her husband, Anakin Skywalker—a fallen Jedi also known as the Sith Lord Darth Vader (Rhaegar, aka, that one people thought was The One but actually wasn't cos actually it's his son)—Luke is heir to a family (Targaran) deeply powerful in the Force.

Luke was taken to the desert planet of Tatooine (Winterfell) to be raised as a moisture farmer by his Uncle Owen Lars (Ned Stark) and Aunt Beru.

Thanks for this, Mr. Allen!

[Ygrain]

Luke Skywalker moment, huh? Wonderful! Luke grew up thinking that his father was a good, honest, simple man, only to find out that he was actually an embodiment of evil, only to find out even later that he was not quite so evil :D

'Cause, correct me if I am wrong, but Jon knows only the "horrible Rhaegar kindapped and raped Lyanna to her death" version, right?

[Buried Treasure]

:crying: I typed a post and lost it :crying: . and second time round I always run out of patience and never write so good...

It is truly complicated. I feel that a king should also take certain oaths, and if he fails to uphold those oaths his people should have the right to oust him! ^_^

I agree, but its not just oaths. It's law as well. Westeros does not seem to have a complex legal code but they do have established laws and these do exist in distinction from the whims of the ruling monarch. If something is illegal and the king does it that does not make the act legal, it is just that the law is not enforced and nobody mentions that the king is now a criminal. After all not only does he have the most swords but he is also the highest judge in the land.

Kings can commit murder and Aery did. His 'trial' of Brandon and Rickard was farcical and did not give him the remit to put them to death that a properly constituted trial would have. Even more clear-cut, he ordered the deaths of Eddard and Robert without even the pretence of a trial. When a king flouts the law and only the powerless suffer then they will not have to face consequences, but in this case he angered powerful houses.

Frankly, I feel it would also serve as a reason for the Starks to keep their distance from the Targaryens. If King Torrhen had not bent the knee to Aegon, and the Starks went against the Targs in an attempt to warg the dragons, the results could have been disastrous. I'm sure the Targs would have tried to wipe them out, since the wargs would have been a constant threat to their rule. King Torrhen bending the knee allowed for the houses to have a mutual respect for one another, since the Targs were unsure of the Starks abilities. ;)

I don't think we can know for certain that any Starks before the current generation were wargs. Any rumours that came down from the age of heroes are as much myth as history and the stone wolves may be in the crypts may be just because it is the sigil of the house - chosen for the mundane reason that the direwolf is a fearsome beast. The current Starks may not have inherited their ability from a distant ancestor but been given it by the old gods - as they were given their wolves.

300 years ago Torrhen may have been a man who no more believed in magic than most of the characters did at the beginning of the story. He must have heard of the dragons on Dragonstone but that was far from his kingdom and he probably never gave them a second thought until he heard of the invasion. Then, after hearing of Harrenhal and the Field of Flame he may have thought of his own vast and flammable forests (I've always presumed Aegon invaded at the start of Summer) and knelt. The Targaryen lack of interest in the North is partially explained by the distance. But also, the Targaryens unified Westeros by adopting Andal culture and the North did not fit with that narrative. If the Targaryens had focused more attention of the kingdoms attention on the North (and similarly the Iron born) it might have made compromises with the groups like the Faith more difficult.

[Budj]

If Alfie's Darth Vader comparison is true...then Jon's father is thought to be dead, but still alive....otherwise it isn't a good comparison.

[kg1982]

I love that part...and I think it is pretty significant foreshadowing to future revelations....and I'm not sure if one of the follow up commenters thought the capitalized "his" was referring to LC Mormont or not...but I think that "his" refers to the ravens eyes not leaving Jon Snow...not Mormont's...the way I read the response makes me think they took it as Mormont suspected when I think Mormont is oblivious.

Agreed-- The only Nights Watch member who might be aware is Benjen and he was very much against Jon joining the Watch. Perhaps he didn't think that this is what Lyanna would have wanted.

On one hand the mention of Targaryens and royal succession seems telling, on the other the "Luke Skywalker" thing is... confusing.

Actually Luke Skywalker is what gives it away for me -- Boy with a huge destiny hidden at birth for his own protection who has no idea about his father or mother.

[Dernhelm]

i hope this doesn't mean that Rhaegar is very evil like Darth Vader was (even though he was vindicated in the end, he was still evil for quite a time).

[Bushido]

Besides,Alfie asked about parents not Jon's mother,so Ned is def.out of picture. Except for possibility that Alfie is trolling us :D

[Lady Octarina]

Oh, I totally agree that he is nothing like Aerion, Viserys, or any of the bad Targs., just tragic.

In that theory, definitely Rhaegar would be more of a gothic figure who might see the world as a lesser place for Lyanna to be.

Do we know what the death traditions of the Targs. were?

Do we know of any of the Targ. Queens surviving their Husbands as Dowagers, or might they have gone with them, leaving the Crown Prince to become King?

Anyway, these are far and away totally different concepts to speculate on, but fun nonetheless. :)

I don't think that's a Targaryen tradition, it just wouldn't make much sense. If that was the case Aerys probably wouldn't have sent Rhaella to Dragonstone for protection, but have her dying by his side in KL (he only needed Viserys safe, there were no guarantees the baby would be another boy, and indeed, it wasn't). I think we don't hear about what happened to their queens because westerosi society doesn't really give much thought to women expect where reproduction is concerned, and they probably died young due to health problems derived from too many pregnancies anyway.

300 years ago Torrhen may have been a man who no more believed in magic than most of the characters did at the beginning of the story. He must have heard of the dragons on Dragonstone but that was far from his kingdom and he probably never gave them a second thought until he heard of the invasion. Then, after hearing of Harrenhal and the Field of Flame he may have thought of his own vast and flammable forests (I've always presumed Aegon invaded at the start of Summer) and knelt. The Targaryen lack of interest in the North is partially explained by the distance. But also, the Targaryens unified Westeros by adopting Andal culture and the North did not fit with that narrative. If the Targaryens had focused more attention of the kingdoms attention on the North (and similarly the Iron born) it might have made compromises with the groups like the Faith more difficult.

:agree:

On the other hand, isn't it repeatedly said/speculated that magic only left the world after the dragons disappeared? So maybe that generation of Starks and a few more still had warging abilities, even if they weren't fully aware of how to control them and probably didn't have the necessary training for being a threat to the dragonlords. I mean, the last dragon died what? 150 years before AGoT? Assuming magic in Westeros died with them, that's plenty of time for the Starks to forget/doubt their own magical abilities. So, whereas I agree with how you see Torhenn bending the knee, I do think the other theory has some merit - but more on the side of Targaryens being traditionally scared/cautious of those abilities the Starks were said to have than of the Starks actually posing them a threat.

*

And on the Alfie Allen subject, I really don't think he was supposed to reveal that much lol

[Maxpey]

I don't think it's a boast, I think it's just a rumor that Lord Godric (who is lord of Sweetsister, IIRC, not White Harbor) passed along. It is most certainly false, for one simple reason: according to the story, Ned fathered Jon early on in the war, before he married Catelyn; yet Ned himself tells Robert that he fathered Jon after he married Catelyn. It's possible Ned is lying (and indeed, he most likely is, if R+L=J is true), but he really has no reason to if Jon's mother really was just a random fisherman's daughter, as Lord Godric would have it. However, it makes far more sense for Ned to lie if Jon is really Rhaegar's son.

Speaking of Ned's lies, why did Ned lie to Robert when he led him to believe that Wylla was Jon's mother, but not Catelyn and Jon? Instead of telling them that Wylla was Jon's mother, he refused to say anything.

I am curious about people's theories why Ned wasn't consistent in how he dealt with telling people about Jon's mother.

Has this been discussed before in another thread?

[sagaz]

Thanks for directing me to the interview. I didn't know he gave one and especially that he compared Jon to Luke Skywalker!!! So who's Luke?

The son of former Queen of Naboo and Republic Senator Padmé Amidala (Royal or important noblewoman aka Lyanna Stark) and her husband, Anakin Skywalker—a fallen Jedi also known as the Sith Lord Darth Vader (Rhaegar, aka, that one people thought was The One but actually wasn't cos actually it's his son)—Luke is heir to a family (Targaran) deeply powerful in the Force.

Luke was taken to the desert planet of Tatooine (Winterfell) to be raised as a moisture farmer by his Uncle Owen Lars (Ned Stark) and Aunt Beru.

Thanks for this, Mr. Allen!

Mormont / Aemon are Jon's equivalent of Obi Wan. The next two books will take an "empire strikes back" turn. Jon will go to winterfell and find a clue in Lyanna's grave that to know more about his origins he needs to find Howland Reed (Yoda) in the crannogs

I can't decide if Sam is R2 or C3PO (human cyber relations)

:rofl:

[Ygrain]

Speaking of Ned's lies, why did Ned lie to Robert when he led him to believe that Wylla was Jon's mother, but not Catelyn and Jon? Instead of telling them that Wylla was Jon's mother, he refused to say anything.

I am curious about people's theories why Ned wasn't consistent in how he dealt with telling people about Jon's mother.

Has this been discussed before in another thread?

I believe his honour is the answer. He tried to lie as little as possible, especially not to those he loved, so he kept silent - on the other hand, Robert was both the one poising danger to Jon and entitled to demand an answer, so he is inevitably the one Ned has to lie to.

[Teal'c]

If Alfie's Darth Vader comparison is true...then Jon's father is thought to be dead, but still alive....otherwise it isn't a good comparison.

Time will tell.

[Buried Treasure]

On the other hand, isn't it repeatedly said/speculated that magic only left the world after the dragons disappeared? So maybe that generation of Starks and a few more still had warging abilities, even if they weren't fully aware of how to control them and probably didn't have the necessary training for being a threat to the dragonlords. I mean, the last dragon died what? 150 years before AGoT? Assuming magic in Westeros died with them, that's plenty of time for the Starks to forget/doubt their own magical abilities. So, whereas I agree with how you see Torhenn bending the knee, I do think the other theory has some merit - but more on the side of Targaryens being traditionally scared/cautious of those abilities the Starks were said to have than of the Starks actually posing them a threat.

It is repeatedly said, but whenever it is shown then the magic in question always has some fire aspect. The glass candles work, but they are dragonglass, the pyromancers spells are more effective, and I think the Valyrian spells used by the armourer who reforged Ice as well. OTOH the Starks formed their bonds with the wolves before magic returned and the wildlings never lost the skill of skinchanging in the first place. Hopefully we will learn more with the next Dunk & Egg story but at the moment I don't think there is any reason to think the Starks hadn't forgotten all magic hundreds of years before Aegon arrived.

[Ben amido]

did ane1 c the season 2 finale... the subtle use of snow in the throne room in dany's visit to the house of the undying.....

cmon the writers know shit.... grrm told them so.....

[Maxpey]

I believe his honour is the answer. He tried to lie as little as possible, especially not to those he loved, so he kept silent - on the other hand, Robert was both the one poising danger to Jon and entitled to demand an answer, so he is inevitably the one Ned has to lie to.

Thanks for responding.

That is as good an explanation as any.

But I do have one issue with it. Why would his sense of honor permit him to lie to Robert, his best friend and the King of Westeros, but not to a Catelyn, a woman he married for political purposes and who he barely knew?

[LittleDragon8]

did ane1 c the season 2 finale... the subtle use of snow in the throne room in dany's visit to the house of the undying.....

cmon the writers know shit.... grrm told them so.....

I think this actually might refer to something else: the way I interpreted the scene it could be a vision of the future where the entire country is sacked, rendering the Iron Throne meaningless, and the only way to prevent this, is to look beyond the Wall.

[The guy from the Vale]

@Buried Treasure: I agree about the accepted laws and customs. But actually, when a bannerman swears a vow of fealty, the liege swears an oath himself, as we see in the scene where Cat accepts Brienne's oath. And in his part of the oath, the liege swears to always judge his bannerman justly, and to never ask him to compromise his own honour. But by denying Rickard and Brandon a trial, Aerys broke that vow to the Starks. And by asking Jon Aryn to deliver Robert and Ned, whom he had sworn to protect, he also broke the vow to the Arryns. Basically, this gave Jon, Ned and Robert a free pass to rebel.

[TheLastHero]

If i am honest i don't think Jon is any part dragon or he is Lyanna's either. Everyone had this theory since day one, but isn't it a bit too obvious for GRRM to add in. Also it is cliche and It pretty much makes Dany's storyline redundant especially since Aegon has been revealed as alive. It seems silly to have Jon as Rhaegar's son as well. There are only two ways in which i think it could work: Only some characters find out and Jon accepts he will never find out and it is irrelevant because he is a man of the watch. Or, he found out and becomes a kind of new Night King but that won't happen because he has honor. I can actually however see him helping Aegon and Danaerys calm and unite the North and destroy the Lannisters.

[nothatso]

Everyone had this theory since day one, but isn't it a bit too obvious for GRRM to add in.

This actually false. I wish I could post some quotes from an article on The Citadel, but that part of the website is still having issues. MANY people do not pick up on this without outside help, especially those who did not have the luxury of reading all five books in succession. Also, the answers given on page within the book would be considered more obvious, like Ashara, Wylla, and the fisherman's daughter. You also shouldn't assume Aegon is who he claims to be.