R+L=J v. 26

[Gala]

But, Brandon was the presumptive Heir- first born son.

Had he lived, he would have been Lord instead of Ned, and while Ned most likely loved his Brother from a loyal, and familial standpoint, I do think there was some tension between them, especially if the speculation is true about Brandon and Ashara.

Ned may have spent a good deal of his time going behind Brandon to "clean up" after him.

Nonetheless, homage to him would have still been done.

As I understood Ned, he had never wanted to become a Lord (I presume he was smart enough to understand that it is a huge responsibility and that you won't be free anymore once you become a Lord) and he wouldn't mind "to clean up" after Brandon. He was nothing like Stannis, who is willing to kill (and kills) his little (well, stupid and ambitious) brother. It seems Ned loved his brother a great deal and admired him (in some ways). Any tension disappears if the one you truly love dies (I mean brother not a woman), you regret everything that was between you (quarrels, tension…well anything) and Ned really loved his wild brother and sister and he missed them, so it doesn't fit here. I think for Ned that episode with Ashara is not important, at least anymore, if it actually was what we think it was.

[The Sword of 11:28 am]

So for this to be like Luke Skywalker, R would have had to marry L. When would he have done that? Those brief moments after Gregor killed Elia? Could he have married L while he was still married to Elia? Does bigamy prevent J from being a bastard? I would love to see a bastard sit on the Iron Throne! Jon has amazing skills in bringing people together, and tearing them apart. A crow says King.

there is precedent for Targ's taking multiple wives (Aegon I for sure and i think either maegor the cruel or aegon the unworthy, unsure), so Rhaegar could have done this, and people in this thread have mentioned the fact that the Isle of Faces, where there is a weirwood, was located close to either TOJ or harrenhall, so they could have married there.

one point about the Luke reference, and GRRM really stirred up the pot with that, because it is soooooooo vague, is that Luke was raised by his fathers family, NOT his mothers. could be inconsequential, but i am trying to think outside the box with the Luke reference instead of jumping to the glaringly obvious vader=rhaegar reference. it was the first thing that entered my mind, but i tried to pick past it a little more. i could be over-analyzing it. i am not sure who this points to other than Brandon, or possibly benjen? but i dont think timelines work, nor do i think benjen makes any sense...

[Lady Octarina]

I tend to lean more towards Brandon seducing and then dumping Ashara, but exactly my thoughts.

For whatever Rhaegar was planning, whether it was an innocent, "meet and greet" with the Lords of the land at Harrenhal, or something more substantial, Dayne seemed to be involved, and the violation his sister, might be the catalyst that drove Arthur to support Rhaegar immediately, and politically

I had just wondered what made Arthur Dayne allow himself be part of the scandal that was R+L, unless the TOJ was also headquarters for Rhaegar to make plans to deal with his Father as well as keep Lyanna securely in place as his wife when they returned to KL

Whereas that does put Arthur's actions under a more honorable light, I doubt Aerys raped her, mainly because, well, someone pointed out in one of the previous threads, I think, that Barristan doesn't make it clear if it was one of the Starks who got Ashara pregnant or someone else, but he does seem to know who it was. If it had been Aerys, wouldn't he have switched loyalty long before the Trident? And anyway, it seems to me like too much of a "let's find YG's parents" theory, and as I think he's Ilyrio's boy, I don't support it :drunk:

But I disagree that she wouldn't have put up a fight if Aerys tried to rape her; she's Dornish, after all :bowdown:

And finally, my main problem with this theory is that it turns Arthur into an excessively honorable character. This is ASoIaF, every character must have some faults, Arthur's could be exactly putting his loyalty to his friend before the loyalty to his king.

[Maxpey]

Ok, then answer these questions:

1) Why is Ned so tight-lipped about Jon's mother's identity? And if his mother is a noblewoman, then why would Ned lie to Robert and tell her it was a commoner? Note that lying to your king is treason, so Ned better have a darn good reason to lie.

2) What were Ned's promises to Lyanna, and what price did he pay to keep them?

3) Why does Ned think to himself that he's been "living lies" for fourteen years?

4) Why, when prompted to list all his children in his own mind, does Ned not include Jon? And don't say he was listing all his trueborn children; that interpretation doesn't work if you look at the context.

I can try to answer these questions, but you will probably dismiss my answers, which is certainly your prerogative. Please be advised that my responses rely on 2 assumptions: (1) that Lyanna and Rhaegar had a child; and (2) that Ned left this child in the care of a third party for safekeeping.

1) The circumstances behind Jon's conception and how he took custody of Jon him from his mother are directly connected to what happened at the TOJ. Thus, if Ned revealed the truth to anyone about Jon's mother, even Catelyn, he ran the risk of Robert discovering his treason at the TOJ. Anticipating your objection, I freely admit that this answer relies on a vast amount of speculation on my part.

2) Ned promised Lyanna to protect her son with Rhaegar. The price he paid was the guilt he felt about lying to Robert about Lyanna, as well as the remorse he felt about not being able to trust Catelyn enough to tell her the truth about Jon. Ned felt especially ashamed about not telling Jon, because it had to leave a void in his son's life.

3)The lies he has lived are telling Robert that Wylla was Jon's mother, letting Robert believe that Lyanna was kidnapped and raped, and not telling Catelyn and Jon the truth about Jon's mother, a lie by omission. Perhaps the biggest lie Ned was living is that he tried to convince himself that he he was, and always has been, an honorable man. But, looking back on what he had done the past 14 years, i.e., fathering a bastard child, promising his sister he would protect her child but instead giving him/her to another person for safekeeping and committing treason against his best friend and king in the process, failing to protect Jon against Catelyn's animosity, etc., he realizes that he has not been such an honorable man after all.

4)Even though you have disqualified my answer, it's a plausible explanation. The fact that Ned did not include Jon's name in the list of children in his head indicates that Ned himself thought of Jon as an outsider in his own family, an afterthought who came behind his children with Catelyn. No doubt Ned would have felt ashamed of feeling this way about Jon.

Please understand that although I dislike R + L = J, I have grudgingly accepted that it is almost certainly true. I just wanted to provide what I thought were plausible answers to your questions that did not require a person to conclude that R + L = J.

[Vhailorian]

Targaryen's often had two wives, so he might have married Lyanna, making Jon a legitimate son. And most people don't believe that Young Griff is really Aegon Targaryen, it looks more likely that he is a Blackfyre descendant who Illyrio and Varys are trying to put on the throne. Remember, Dany is given the image of the "mummer's dragon." This is strong evidence that Young Griff is a pretender with Illyrio and Varys pulling the strings.

Just wanted to throw in that the "mummers dragon" could in fact be literally interpreted as "The Dragon of the Mummer." Given what we know of Varys' history "Young Griff" could, in theory, be legit and still be the "mummer's dragon."

[Alia of the knife]

As I understood Ned, he had never wanted to become a Lord (I presume he was smart enough to understand that it is a huge responsibility and that you won't be free anymore once you become a Lord) and he wouldn't mind "to clean up" after Brandon. He was nothing like Stannis, who is willing to kill (and kills) his little (well, stupid and ambitious) brother. It seems Ned loved his brother a great deal and admired him (in some ways). Any tension disappears if the one you truly love dies (I mean brother not a woman), you regret everything that was between you (quarrels, tension…well anything) and Ned really loved his wild brother and sister and he missed them, so it doesn't fit here. I think for Ned that episode with Ashara is not important, at least anymore, if it actually was what we think it was.

I don't disagree with any of your points, but I think it had just been a given that Ned just followed, whereas in some revelations, as in his conversation with Cat about everything being meant for Brandon, could perhaps point to a more complicated, nuanced relationship.

[Alia of the knife]

there is precedent for Targ's taking multiple wives (Aegon I for sure and i think either maegor the cruel or aegon the unworthy, unsure), so Rhaegar could have done this, and people in this thread have mentioned the fact that the Isle of Faces, where there is a weirwood, was located close to either TOJ or harrenhall, so they could have married there.

one point about the Luke reference, and GRRM really stirred up the pot with that, because it is soooooooo vague, is that Luke was raised by his fathers family, NOT his mothers. could be inconsequential, but i am trying to think outside the box with the Luke reference instead of jumping to the glaringly obvious vader=rhaegar reference. it was the first thing that entered my mind, but i tried to pick past it a little more. i could be over-analyzing it. i am not sure who this points to other than Brandon, or possibly benjen? but i dont think timelines work, nor do i think benjen makes any sense...

I think it's a matter of just reversing families here, because it doesn't have to be exact, just an analogy.

Given that Jons Fathers family would have been Targaryens, there isn't any way he could have been raised with them, so the Mother's family fits better.

In Darth Vaders case, he was from humble origins, and easy to hide, whereas Rhaegar was not.

Whereas that does put Arthur's actions under a more honorable light, I doubt Aerys raped her, mainly because, well, someone pointed out in one of the previous threads, I think, that Barristan doesn't make it clear if it was one of the Starks who got Ashara pregnant or someone else, but he does seem to know who it was. If it had been Aerys, wouldn't he have switched loyalty long before the Trident? And anyway, it seems to me like too much of a "let's find YG's parents" theory, and as I think he's Ilyrio's boy, I don't support it :drunk:

But I disagree that she wouldn't have put up a fight if Aerys tried to rape her; she's Dornish, after all :bowdown:

And finally, my main problem with this theory is that it turns Arthur into an excessively honorable character. This is ASoIaF, every character must have some faults, Arthur's could be exactly putting his loyalty to his friend before the loyalty to his king.

I don't know about Selmy, though he seemed to have feelings for Ashara, I think Selmy always stays within the boundries- as I said, he doesn't seem to judge, but follow whatever King is in place.

He went from Aerys, Robert, would have followed Joffrey even until he was "retired."

It just seem thats all he knows to do, despite what his personal feelings are.

And I doubt for a minute that Ashara would have fought Aerys, I just don't think she would have prevailed, whereas at least Lyanna might have been able to get away. :fencing:

(I don't think Aerys is in top shape at this point in his life). :stillsick:

But, I do tend to think it was Brandon who dishonored Ashara, and as you say with Arthur, he could have done just that for their friendship, rather than anything else.

[7V3N]

So for this to be like Luke Skywalker, R would have had to marry L. When would he have done that? Those brief moments after Gregor killed Elia? Could he have married L while he was still married to Elia? Does bigamy prevent J from being a bastard? I would love to see a bastard sit on the Iron Throne! Jon has amazing skills in bringing people together, and tearing them apart. A crow says King.

Rhaegar couldn't have married Lyanna after Elia was killed, since he was dead by then. He could, however, have married her polygamously early on in the war, and a child from their marriage would theoretically be legitimate (though pragmatically speaking, there probably would have been some protests from the other houses).

Dragonfish is right on. Remember that Aegon the Conqueror married both his sisters Visenya and Rhaenys. The Targaryens are the exception to the incest laws, so perhaps polygamy applies as well, but was not practiced due to bad PR.

And Jon has horrible skills at bringing people together. He handled the wildling/crow merge horribly. He alienated many of his brothers which eventually led to the assassination plot. He has too strong of a sense of duty to the Night's Watch. He would never accept the Iron Throne.

In regards to Ser Barristan, I think it is the oath. He takes his oaths as a knight and a Kinsguard member more serious than his own life. He lives to fulfill his oaths. He may be the one true knight left in the world.

[Budj]

Just to reiterate a previous point. Jon turned down Winterfell because he would have had to sacrifice everything it represented (and what he identifies with) to the Red God had he accepted the offer.

And Jon has horrible skills at bringing people together. He handled the wildling/crow merge horribly. He alienated many of his brothers which eventually led to the assassination plot. He has too strong of a sense of duty to the Night's Watch. He would never accept the Iron Throne.

Jon actually did a pretty good job imo. It isn't his fault he had prejudiced officers that weren't willing to listen to him either. I don't think there is anything he could have said to get them to sway their minds short of "let all the windings die and turn into ice zombies." Most of the night's watch agreed with his decisions or at least trusted his decision and remained loyal.

[gougef]

If Martin is Martin there is no way he will be king. I think a heroic, tragic death is in order.

Given the history of Westeros, making him king would be the most tragic thing to do to him. Just King in the North would be better.

[Thoheeks Bili]

_{The Luke Skywalker statement also can play into the theory of Luke= Jon and Princess Leia = Meera..twins seperated after birth and raised seperately without ever knowing that their true sibling is alive or even ..........their sibling. :cool4: :bang:}

[7V3N]

Just to reiterate a previous point. Jon turned down Winterfell because he would have had to sacrifice everything it represented (and what he identifies with) to the Red God had he accepted the offer.

Jon actually did a pretty good job imo. It isn't his fault he had prejudiced officers that weren't willing to listen to him either. I don't think there is anything he could have said to get them to sway their minds short of "let all the windings die and turn into ice zombies." Most of the night's watch agreed with his decisions or at least trusted his decision and remained loyal.

You don't think it would have helped to gather all the people at the Wall and give a good speech about who the true enemies are? He never emphasized to the NW brothers that their order exists because of the White Walkers, not the wildlings. Other than that, he was good at his job. He just didn't allow people to understand his thought process.

[Dragonfish]

@Maxpey--

Your first two answers are acceptable, but I object to your last two.

1) Regarding the lies Ned lived, the thing that's important to note is that "living lies" means pretending to be something you're not. I don't think your answers satisfy that definition.

2) As I said, your interpretation of Ned's quote doesn't really work based on context. Ned is prompted to think of his children in his own mind because Cersei asks him if he loves them. She does not make a distinction between trueborn and bastardborn when asking this question. Indeed, it would be absurd for her to do so, since her whole point is that everything she does is for her children, who are themselves bastards. So, the only reason Ned would have for leaving Jon out of his list of children would be that he didn't truly love him. Is this something you're prepared to argue?

ETA--Oh, and here's another question that I neglected to include before:

How do you interpret the vision of the blue rose growing from a wall of ice that Dany sees in the House of the Undying?

[sarina]

Another thing I saw somebody point out about the season 2 finale of GoT is that in Dany's HOTU vision there is a bunch of SNOW on the throne. She almost touches it, but is then called away by the screeching of her dragons.

[Lady Octarina]

Another thing I saw somebody point out about the season 2 finale of GoT is that in Dany's HOTU vision there is a bunch of SNOW on the throne. She almost touches it, but is then called away by the screeching of her dragons.

Yes, that has been interpreted many ways, the two most popular being that Jon would get the throne, or that KL will be hit hard by Winter and all it brings. Of course, the TV show is not exactly canon, but both are reasonable assumptions considering all we see in the books. But people are making the craziest theories based on that season finale; for example, I've seen many claiming the baby Drogo was holding was Jon himself, not Rhaego. :eek:

[Maxpey]

@Maxpey--

Your first two answers are acceptable, but I object to your last two.

1) Regarding the lies Ned lived, the thing that's important to note is that "living lies" means pretending to be something you're not. I don't think your answers satisfy that definition.

2) As I said, your interpretation of Ned's quote doesn't really work based on context. Ned is prompted to think of his children in his own mind because Cersei asks him if he loves them. She does not make a distinction between trueborn and bastardborn when asking this question. Indeed, it would be absurd for her to do so, since her whole point is that everything she does is for her children, who are themselves bastards. So, the only reason Ned would have for leaving Jon out of his list of children would be that he didn't truly love him. Is this something you're prepared to argue?

ETA--Oh, and here's another question that I neglected to include before:

How do you interpret the vision of the blue rose growing from a wall of ice that Dany sees in the House of the Undying?

You raise very fair points.

As to the "lived his lies for 14 years" statement, we may be playing with semantics. I took it to mean that Ned told a series of lies 14 years ago that had weighed heavily on his conscience ever since, so much so that he still had nightmares about them. It appears that you interpret the line to mean that Ned had been living lies for 14 years, i.e., holding himself out to the world as Jon's father for the last 14 years.

(just out curiosity, going by your interpretation what other lies has Ned been living for the past 14 years?)

As to your second point, again I just interpret the statement differently. Ned is not responding to Cersei's question whether he loves his children by naming his children in his head. Rather, he is trying to empathize with Cersei by thinking to himself what he would do if he was forced to choose between the life of some child and his own children. He thinks about his 5 children with Catelyn first. This is because in Ned's own mind Jon's identity as a bastard sets him apart from his children with Catelyn, at times much to his shame. Before he gets to Jon, an extremely unpleasant thought invades his mind; what would Catelyn do if it was Jon's life against her own children? He realizes that Catelyn would sacrifice Jon's life in exchange for her own. The idea is too unpleasant for him to bear so he changes the subject back to Cersei and her children.

The blue rose could simply signify the North in general, and the Wall refers to Jon in particular, if it means anything at all.

Like I said in my response, I am not trying to tell you that I am right. In fact, I would state that the vast majority of posters would agree with all of your assertions.

I just think that there are plausible alternative explanations for some of the "clues" about R + L = J.

[Dragonfish]

As to the "lived with lies" statement, we may be playing with semantics. I took it to mean that Ned told a series of lies 14 years ago and they have been weighing on his conscience ever since. It appears that you interpret the line to mean that Ned has been living with lies for 14 years, such as telling the entire world for the last 14 years that he is Jon's son.

Well, I'm just basing my argument on what "living lies" actually means. It means presenting something about yourself to the world that is false. It's also a pretty continuous thing (i.e., when one is living lies one is constantly presenting lies about oneself), whereas your interpretation relies on Ned having told a few lies fourteen years ago. For these reasons, I just don't find your interpretation to be reasonable.

As to your second point, again I just interpret the statement differently. Ned is not responding to Cersei's question whether he loves his children by naming his children in his head. Rather, he is trying to empathize with Cersei by thinking to himself what he would do if he was forced to choose between the life of some child and his own children. He thinks about his 5 children with Catelyn first. Before he gets to Jon, an extremely unpleasant thought invades his mind; what would Catelyn do if it was Jon's life against her own children.

Yes, but as I said, Ned is prompted to think of his children in general, with no distinction between trueborn and bastardborn. He asks himself what he would do if he had to choose between his children's lives, and the life of a child he did not know. There is no good reason why he would leave Jon out of this dilemma. Surely he would feel torn if he had to choose between Jon's life and the life of another child, no?

And yes, he does eventually think of Jon, but only as an example of the "other child" against whose life Catelyn must weigh the lives of her own children.

The blue rose could simply signify the North in general, and the Wall refers to Jon in particular, if it means anything at all.

I'm curious how you arrived at the interpretation that the blue rose represents the North in general, especially given how often the imagery of blue roses is tied to Lyanna and Rhaegar.

[Maxpey]

Well, I'm just basing my argument on what "living lies" actually means. It means presenting something about yourself to the world that is false. It's also a pretty continuous thing (i.e., when one is living lies one is constantly presenting lies about oneself), whereas your interpretation relies on Ned having told a few lies fourteen years ago. For these reasons, I just don't find your interpretation to be reasonable.

Yes, but as I said, Ned is prompted to think of his children in general, with no distinction between trueborn and bastardborn. He asks himself what he would do if he had to choose between his children's lives, and the life of a child he did not know. There is no good reason why he would leave Jon out of this dilemma. Surely he would feel torn if he had to choose between Jon's life and the life of another child, no?

And yes, he does eventually think of Jon, but only as an example of the "other child" against whose life Catelyn must weigh the lives of her own children.

I'm curious how you arrived at the interpretation that the blue rose represents the North in general, especially given how often the imagery of blue roses is tied to Lyanna and Rhaegar.

Again, I interpret the statement that "Ned had lived his lies for 14 years" to mean that even though he told his lies 14 years ago, the consequences have literally haunted him continuously for the past 14 years.

As to the second part, we can just disagree.

As to the blue rose, that's all I could come up with.

[Sapphire]

Aww, I seem to have missed the immediate aftermath of Alfie Allen's interview and have seen people across the net start to question this theory because the two situations don't match up perfectly. My take is Jon's parentage reveal will be one of those "holy shit! no fucking way" pop culture moments for casual fans and that's all Alfie meant.

Given the history of Westeros, making him king would be the most tragic thing to do to him. Just King in the North would be better.

Jon will be miserable sitting the throne in KL. Part of the reason I want him on the blasted thing. Can't have the king of a post zombie ravaged Westeros too happy, can we. :laugh:

[Dr. Pepper]

Aww, I seem to have missed the immediate aftermath of Alfie Allen's interview and have seen people across the net start to question this theory because the two situations don't match up perfectly. My take is Jon's parentage reveal will be one of those "holy shit! no fucking way" pop culture moments for casual fans and that's all Alfie meant.

This is exactly what I think. :) I think people are reading way too much into Alfie's comments. In all of his interviews he's exhibited good knowledge of the character he plays and it's apparent that he's drawn some of this knowledge from the books. However, his interviews also make it very apparent that he was just a casual reader for things that didn't directly concern his character. For a casual reader that didn't catch onto R+L=J right away, it would be shocking.