Maybe R+L=J is not true?

[Maxpey]

You could still be right, since the truth has not been revealed. :D

Please, no, don't tell me that I could be right.

I was just beginning to accept that I was wrong about another theory. :dunno:

[House Martell]

citadel/Prophecies:

Aemon points out that "prince" is an error of translation, that among the Valyrians the term was as fluid in terms of gender as the gender of dragons was, and could just as well apply to a princess (IV: 520). But who are the others? Martin has stated that Rhaenys is definitely dead, but also that the three heads need not be Targaryens.

[Lonin]

I am somewhat agnostic over the R+L=J theory. It would not surprise me if it were to be true... Also, I would not be surprised if we never find out. Its up to GRRM

The question of why the 3 KG remains at ToJ is that Rhaegar told/ordered them too. IMO , in organizations like the KG you dont get to parse the meanings of your vows, They were told by Rhaegar to stay and guard ToJ/ Lyanna and thats what they will do, to the death.

The only two options for them are to yield (bend the knee) or to fight - they fight.

Based upon some comments, I guess I should have been clearer, IMO , in organizations like the KG, you are expected to follow orders. Rhaegar telling/ordering them to stay, is all the reason they need. There need be no king at ToJ for them to stay. I dont think members of the KG get to parse vows to justify not following orders.

[Lady Tippy Wolfsbane]

Please, no, don't tell me that I could be right.

I was just beginning to accept that I was wrong about another theory. :dunno:

You cannot be wrong, since no one else has been proven correct. I could argue your point the same way I argue my own. I just choose to believe my own viewpoint. ;)

ETA: If you like, I can give you an argument for your theory.

citadel/Prophecies:

:agree: So, what's your point.

[Dragonfish]

Based upon some comments, I guess I should have been clearer, IMO , in organizations like the KG, you are expected to follow orders. Rhaegar telling/ordering them to stay, is all the reason they need. There need be no king at ToJ for them to stay. I dont think members of the KG get to parse vows to justify not following orders.

Except that their vow to the king is explicitly stated by Barristan to be their "first duty." So there is in fact a hierarchy of vows, with protecting the king being the most important. If the Kingsguard are knowingly neglecting to protect the king so they can follow the obsolete orders of their dead prince, then they are violating their most important vow.

And anyway, it's not like the two options are mutually exclusive. There's no reason why one of them could not have been dispatched to Dragonstone while the rest stayed at the tower. So then why did all three of them choose to stay? IMO, the best explanation is that their king is with them in that tower.

[Maxpey]

You cannot be wrong, since no one else has been proven correct. I could argue your point the same way I argue my own. I just choose to believe my own viewpoint. ;)

ETA: If you like, I can give you an argument for your theory.

:agree: So, what's your point.

Thanks for the support.

I would love an argument in support of my theory!

[Lady Tippy Wolfsbane]

Based upon some comments, I guess I should have been clearer, IMO , in organizations like the KG, you are expected to follow orders. Rhaegar telling/ordering them to stay, is all the reason they need. There need be no king at ToJ for them to stay. I dont think members of the KG get to parse vows to justify not following orders.

I understand, I'm just saying that their duty to the king comes before any order they received from Rhaegar. It seems to me that being members of the KIngsguard, and fulfilling their vows is of the most importance to them.

[House Martell]

Very much true, since the meaning of their vows is clear - always protect the king. Rhaegar's not king, his orders cannot override their basic rule, therefore I'm afraid that the rest of your post is incorrect.

I just don't prescribe to the theory that the KG are some kind of robots incapable of violating their protocol. I think Dayne and Rhaegar were best friends and that means something. I think very likely Rhaegar was planning on disposing of his father or ending his rule in someway and some of the KG may have been in on that plan (which would have been in violation of their vows). And I also don't think, whoever they were trying to protect, fighting the "North 7" would violate their vow. You could see "we swore a vow" and "the KG does not flee" as general statements: "we swore to Rhaegar" " and "we're not running past you guys, to flee to dragonstone".

[House Martell]

:agree: So, what's your point.

just that in order for the child to be PtwP it didn't matter if it was a girl or boy

[Ygrain]

I just don't prescribe to the theory that the KG are some kind of robots incapable of violating their protocol. I think Dayne and Rhaegar were best friends and that means something. I think very likely Rhaegar was planning on disposing of his father or ending his rule in someway and some of the KG may have been in on that plan (which would have been in violation of their vows). And I also don't think, whoever they were trying to protect, fighting the "North 7" would violate their vow. You could see "we swore a vow" and "the KG does not flee" as general statements: "we swore to Rhaegar" " and "we're not running past you guys, to flee to dragonstone".

This is really going in circles. They could have preferred Rhaegar, they could have though Aerys total nuts... but as soon as Viserys became the only known surviving heir, one of them should have gone to him - yet they didn't, not even that single one whose presence was required for the king, and that long before Ned arrived. - And BTW, we have seen at least one of them sticking to the vow no matter what - Hightower, when one Stark was fried and the other strangled.

Also, fighting Ned doesn't really make much sense unless there is a child around - if the KG are no unthinking robots blindly following whatever order/oath, there is no reason why they shouldn't allow Lyanna's reunion with her brother (Robert arriving personally might be a different kettle of fish). If there is a child, then in the current situation, with deadwish for any offspring of Rhaegar, the best way to ensure his safety is not let anyone learn of his existence in the first place, i.e. see neither the child nor Lyanna.

[Lady Tippy Wolfsbane]

I just don't prescribe to the theory that the KG are some kind of robots incapable of violating their protocol. I think Dayne and Rhaegar were best friends and that means something. I think very likely Rhaegar was planning on disposing of his father or ending his rule in someway and some of the KG may have been in on that plan (which would have been in violation of their vows). And I also don't think, whoever they were trying to protect, fighting the "North 7" would violate their vow. You could see "we swore a vow" and "the KG does not flee" as general statements: "we swore to Rhaegar" " and "we're not running past you guys, to flee to dragonstone".

I agree, I think their friendship is why Rhaegar trusted him with the secret of Lyanna and her unborn. There were other knights just as loyal to the Kingsguard (Barristan), but Rhaegar chose to share his secrets with Dayne. I'm also pretty sure Dayne would have known if Rhaegar was planning to dispose his father, but I don't think he would play an active part in the plan, since that would be political.

Past that, believe as you will.

just that in order for the child to be PtwP it didn't matter if it was a girl or boy

I agree, but Rhaegar obviously believed it had to be a boy, which is why he interpreted the prophecy as, "The Prince That Was Promised". I think everyone agrees that Rhaegar wasn't the best at interpreting prophecy.

[Lady Tippy Wolfsbane]

Thanks for the support.

I would love an argument in support of my theory!

You could argue,

After the birth of Aegon and then discovering that Elia could no longer bear children, Rhaegar realized that he must have been wrong about Aegon and Aegon's siblings being the three heads. He figured if he was wrong about himself being TPTWP, he could have also been wrong about Aegon.

He does more research and discovers that prince could mean boy/girl to the Valyrians.

He later meets Lyanna, falls in love with her, and decides she could be the answer to him still fulfilling the prophecy. He marries her so that their children would still be princes and princesses, and once Lyanna became pregnant he figured that this child being a literal, "Song of Ice(Stark) and Fire(Targaryen) had to be TPTWP whether is was a boy or girl.

BOOM!!! There you go. :smug:

I don't personally believe it, and still prefer my own theory, but it is a valid argument. :cheers:

[House Martell]

- And BTW, we have seen at least one of them sticking to the vow no matter what - Hightower, when one Stark was fried and the other strangled.

Maybe seeing that forced him to realize blindly following "vows" isn't necessarily the honorable thing to do.

(Robert arriving personally might be a different kettle of fish).

Come on now, you're saying they'd brake their vow for one guy and not another, that's rather convenient. Ned was the right hand man.

[Dragonfish]

I just don't prescribe to the theory that the KG are some kind of robots incapable of violating their protocol. I think Dayne and Rhaegar were best friends and that means something. I think very likely Rhaegar was planning on disposing of his father or ending his rule in someway and some of the KG may have been in on that plan (which would have been in violation of their vows). And I also don't think, whoever they were trying to protect, fighting the "North 7" would violate their vow. You could see "we swore a vow" and "the KG does not flee" as general statements: "we swore to Rhaegar" " and "we're not running past you guys, to flee to dragonstone".

It really seems like you're just completely ignoring what has been said a million times in this thread.

The vow the Kingsguard refer to is specifically their vow as members of the Kingsguard. It does not refer to a vow they made to Rhaegar. As such, they absolutely would be in violation of their vow if they did not at least try to get to Viserys. Unless, of course, Viserys wasn't the king.

[Sasha Steelsong]

Come on now, you're saying they'd brake their vow for one guy and not another, that's rather convenient. Ned was the right hand man.

No that is not what she's saying at all. What she's saying is that without a child there, there is no real reason for the KG to think Ned is a threat to Lyanna by herself. HOWEVER that they may not have felt the same way if it was her estranged fiance trying to get to her as opposed to her brother. And yes at that point I do think that who the man was makes a difference if what we are discussing is the possibility that it was only Lyanna in the tower and the KG were staying to protect just her. Ned would not have been a threat under those circumstances where as Robert definitely could have been (especially if Lyanna left and wasn't kidnapped), if the KG are not blindly following orders.

The potential presence of a child changes things because then your point actually works, that regardless of whether it is Ned or Robert, both pose a threat to the child and his claim to the throne, because there is no guarentee from the KG POV that Ned will protect the child or his rights.

[House Martell]

The potential presence of a child changes things because then your point actually works, that regardless of whether it is Ned or Robert, both pose a threat to the child and his claim to the throne, because there is no guarentee from the KG POV that Ned will protect the child or his rights.

Or they just really want to kill Ned and his rebels

[corbon]

Or they just really want to kill Ned and his rebels

Which does not fit with their words and vows.

You've had this explained to you many time, but have ignored every explanation.

There is only one explanation for that.

[House Martell]

Which does not fit with their words and vows.

You've had this explained to you many time, but have ignored every explanation.

There is only one explanation for that.

Yes this would be in violation of their vow and what every "explanation" ignores is that these are men not robots. Ned rides in and says "I was at the trident where your best friend died, Jamie (who's on our side now) killed your king, and your prince has run away. So why don't you just bend the knee to me here and we can avoid any unpleasantness"

They respond: "we are the KG (the baddest MoFos around), we don't run from anyone. you killed our king (who we vowed to protect), now we are going to kill you.

Jamie broke his vow, so obviously KG can do it without spontaneously bursting into flames. Plus I still say they could engage the North 7 and fulfill any vow they need to, the two acts do not have to be mutually exclusive. If they did need to go to Dragonstone why would this small engagement negate that, how long do you think "the battle at the ToJ" took, days? no prob over pretty quick. And I don't think those 3 guys went into any fight thinking they were going to lose.

[nQthing]

I don't think the 3kg at the ToJ were trying to avenge aerys

[House Martell]

I don't think the 3kg at the ToJ were trying to avenge aerys

You don't think they would be upset about Aerys, Rhaegar, and Rhaegars wife and kids? I think Rhaegars best friend Ser Aurthur Dayne would be pretty pissed. And no he may not go out on a vengeance mission, but Ned (the rebellions #2 guy) rides right up to him and says they should bend the knee to him.

and I also accept the fact that you don't think that may be the case and acknowledge that you may be right, I also think there is a chance you're not.