Jump to content

R+L=J v.30


Xray the Enforcer

Recommended Posts

Yes, I know. But Rhaegar was never king, and the only previous example of a king declaring his own heir was promptly invalidated by the civil war that ensued.

You mean Robb declaring Jon? :cool4:

On a smaller scale, Tarly declaring Dickon over Samwell?

Because they are sworn to follow the orders of the royal family as well, so long as those orders do not conflict with orders given by the king.

They dont contradict the order of the king.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You mean Robb declaring Jon? :cool4:

There's no evidence that Robb declared Jon his heir, only that he legitimized him.

On a smaller scale, Tarly declaring Dickon over Samwell?

Tarly didn't declare Dickon over Sam, he forced Sam to join the Night's Watch so as to invalidate his claim.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, so we should stop worrying about Robb's will. Renly was never King, Stannis is not king, and everything that happens comes from Joffrey, then Tommen and his advisors. That;s working.

The difference is, thousands of people recognized Robb, Renly, Stannis, Joffrey, and Tommen, as their kings. Three Kingsguards might have done the same for Rhaegar, but never openly - no one declared openly for him. He may have been more of a king than Viserys ever was, but he was still less than even that Blackfyre in "The Mystery Knight" (the Fiddler?).

Yes, Renly was right in saying what he said about how kings are made, but that doesn't justify amplifying it to a ridiculous scale, turning it into a sophism that loses all value.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess I will never "get" the amount of mental pretzeling going on over this. It seems that the KG role is a key hint that Jon is the son of R and L. Or that there is some sort of obstacle course necessary to make everything make sense - but a lot of the stuff that has to make sense is stuff that doesnt come from the books. So I am going back to where I was just after I first opened R + L (before I knew of the = J theory) and before I started reading some of these theories. It just seems like a nonissue at some point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The real question is was the mad king also the dumb king. The 7 Kingdoms were in the middle of a civil war. I can think of no good reason why Aerys could justify having 6 of the 7 KG away from KL. This wasnt an invasion, but a rebellion. It was very likely that there were rebel sympathizers in KL. The threat of an attempt on his life was very real. What was he thinking?

As to naming Jaime to the KG, all I ever hear is it was a way to control Tywin. Actually it may have been much more. At best it was a jape because it forced the great western lord to name a dwarf as his heir. For those such as myself that feel Tyrion is actually an Aerys bastard after he finally gained the king's right, then making Jaime KG also made Aerys bastard the heir to Casterly Rock.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here I am :cool4:

With 'juicy' evidence :leer: of your statement about GRRM's blessing (source: The Graphic Novel - The Making of Game of Thrones - The Characters)

http://www.imagebam....3fc206204694693

All The Making of Game of Thrones section is about the artists' struggle to get the concepts right, to match George's vision and eventually - sic - get into his head and see what he's seeing.

Btw, I'm a She-wolf LOL :lol:

Oh! That. Is. So. Intriguing. A very original contribution to the whole Mummer's/cloth dragon debate...

DOH!! :dunce:

Sorry Frozenfire3. :blush:

And thanks again for that image. :D

Do you have the other link that shows Lyanna, and then Jon, as well as Viserys?

They were really impactful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, 3 out of 7 KG at the Tower of Joy (including Arthur Dayne) would really strongly suggest defending the true heir. Yes, there is this point that Aeris was mad and nobody wanted him, so let's listen to his more sensible and sane heir Rhaegar, but I don't think KG works that way. Look at the most notable living example - Barristan - his motivation being serving the "true" queen. Jaime is the exception of course, but that was a completely different situation.

As for Valyrian Steel's question - I think Aeris and Elia were as safe as they could be in KL. It's a hard place to overtake, and it takes armies, so if the KG members were only one or all of them wouldn't make a difference. The TOJ is another thing though...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its not just that its obvious, its the fact that he is holding a secret like that after so many books and "clues", but keeps saying that the revelation will only come in aDoS, and all we need to justify R+L is the first book...

It's not nearly this obvious to evceryone, and Jon's parentage hasn't had any signifigance in the story at this point. When it is important to the story I'm sure it will be revealed.

From what I read on this site, the Targ line lost its power to rule and only the Baratheons have the real "line of sucession" now. The only means for Jon/Dany/YG to rule is through conquest. Is that correct?

Correct.

I guess I will never "get" the amount of mental pretzeling going on over this. It seems that the KG role is a key hint that Jon is the son of R and L. Or that there is some sort of obstacle course necessary to make everything make sense - but a lot of the stuff that has to make sense is stuff that doesnt come from the books. So I am going back to where I was just after I first opened R + L (before I knew of the = J theory) and before I started reading some of these theories. It just seems like a nonissue at some point.

Mental pretzeling is not needed to explain the actions of the Kingsguard. Their first duty is to protect the king, and this is said throughout the novels. That is all that needs to be taken into account.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, she's the only woman. Which is another notable fact. Bran says Ned placed her there because he loved her. It may be just as likely he placed her there in recognition of her position as a princess of Westeros.

That's what I was thinking. Surely other Winterfell women were beloved. Lyanna may have been royal as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess I will never "get" the amount of mental pretzeling going on over this. It seems that the KG role is a key hint that Jon is the son of R and L. Or that there is some sort of obstacle course necessary to make everything make sense - but a lot of the stuff that has to make sense is stuff that doesnt come from the books. So I am going back to where I was just after I first opened R + L (before I knew of the = J theory) and before I started reading some of these theories. It just seems like a nonissue at some point.

They dont contradict the order of the king.

There must always be at least one KG with the king, except for the shortest possible period when the KG confer. This has been shown in the books repeatedly, and if Viserys is the next in the succession line, Willem Darry's protection is insufficient because he is not KG; a whole army would not suffice as long as there was no KG with him. - Or maybe "suffice" is not the right word: this was not an issue of sufficiency but of fulfilling the KG vow.

Thanks guys. Even raising the genetics question is inherently [har!] flawed point considering it's always a toss of the dice, I just can't comfortably subscribe to a blockbuster theory without allowing as much vetting as possible. I reckon r+l likely = j, but I still have apprehensions when the product has so few traits in common with half of the supposed source, especially while there are rival options abound with more likely physical features.

Okay, -s, option. With silver hair and a streak of black, being described as the most dangerous man in Westeros.

Either way, 30 iterations of this thread, I figured the Mendel chart analysis must have been addressed before and I thank you for entertaining my suspicions.

Rhaegar's daughter by Elia also had very little of his features and took after her mother. IMHO, what GRRM uses is the simple Mendelian model, a bit tweaked to fit the narrative, as it seems to lump family traits into a single one. So far, the presence/lack of features from one of the parents can always be explained by homozygous/heterozygous pairings, and not requiring any special knowledge of genetics. Rhaegar would be homozygous recessive, Elia heterozygous (the Martel and the Targ genes, with dominant Martel look), Rhaenys inherits the Martell look via the dominant alelle she inherits from Elia, while Aegon inherits from her the recessive Targ gene, which in combination with Rhaegar's recessive produces a Targ-looking child. Jon then would be the same situation as Rhaenys.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is Lyanna the only woman in the crypt at Winterfell?

Isn't the crypt reserved for the "Lords of Winterfell"?

I think there may be women buried in the crypts too. Ned tells Robert, "She was a Stark of Winterfell. This is her place". According to Bran, he only broke tradition in building Lyanna and Brandon a statue. Only the Kings of Winter and Lords of Winterfell are supposed to have them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mental pretzeling is not needed to explain the actions of the Kingsguard. Their first duty is to protect the king, and this is said throughout the novels. That is all that needs to be taken into account.

Oh really? Then this part of the thread should have died long ago. <G>

1. They have to obey the king. If he sends them to the crown prince to fight the war, the crown prince can order them around. If he isnt actually speaking actual orders, they ought to do what needs to be done to serve the mission. He can order them thousands of leagues away to protect anyone as long as he is not left alone. The crown prince can order KG to protect a lowborn bastard thousands of leagues away if some of the KG are there. Jaime was with the King. The King ordered everyone else to march to battle under Rhaegar. Rhaegar sent 3 to T o J (unless Aerys sent them there, no hint of that) and there were 3 left to fight with him, fetch armies, etc. When they both died, their job was not to stop the mission in the middle and start running around like sandkings trying to find someone else to protect, besides, Elia and the kids had Jaime to watch them and Willem was taking care of Viserys and his mom. They arent going to drop the assigned mission and run off somewhere to get their next set of orders. Until ordered otherwise, a sensible soldier will stay put, fulfilling his prior orders. No one told them to ditch the T o J and try to decide where to run next. Even if Rh was dead that did not free them from their duty.

All the arguing about whether R and L were married, what Elia thought of all this, if there was polygamy and all the other points of contention(aka the mental pretzeling) and the arguing that the KG would immediately break camp and start milling about (lacking further orders) once Aerys and Rhaegar died) or dash off to find Viserys (who was already covered) or run off anywhere else just dont make sense to me. They were told to do what they were doing and it would just not make sense for them to not complete the duty despite the deaths of those giving the orders. They cant teleport to Viserys, and he is fine anyway. Much more practical to keep on task until told otherwise by whoever becomes king. Or die trying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh really? Then this part of the thread should have died long ago. <G>

Unfortunately there is quite a bit of mental pretzaling done by those trying to find an alternative answer. :P

Of course, if they succeed, it won't be mental pretzaling but so far they have not.

1. They have to obey the king. If he sends them to the crown prince to fight the war, the crown prince can order them around. If he isnt actually speaking actual orders, they ought to do what needs to be done to serve the mission. He can order them thousands of leagues away to protect anyone as long as he is not left alone. The crown prince can order KG to protect a lowborn bastard thousands of leagues away if some of the KG are there. Jaime was with the King. The King ordered everyone else to march to battle under Rhaegar.

Not so. He ordered Hightower to find Rhaegar and get him back to KL to take over as CinC. Presumably Hightower took some other KG with him, probably Whent and maybe Darry.

Once Rhaegar came back (or even once he'd been found), Rhaegar is then CinC. The KG answer to him, so long as it does not contradict their vows. There is no evidence at all that Aerys ordered the KG to go with Rhaegar to the Trident. To the contrary, having been made CinC by Aerys, Rhaegar would be making the dispositions.

When Rhaegar comes back, there is no mention of Hightower or Whent any more, until ToJ. It is a straightforward assumption to guess that Hightower stayed at ToJ, with Whent and Dayne (and probably Darry returned with Rhaegar). It is mental pretzaling to assume that Hightower returned to KL with Rhaegar, and then went back to ToJ.

Rhaegar sent 3 to T o J (unless Aerys sent them there, no hint of that)

No, because they are already there. There is no hint of them coming back to KL.

and there were 3 left to fight with him, fetch armies, etc. When they both died, their job was not to stop the mission in the middle and start running around like sandkings trying to find someone else to protect, besides, Elia and the kids had Jaime to watch them and Willem was taking care of Viserys and his mom.

Their 'standing orders', which take precedent over all others, are that one of them must be with the king.

There is no running around like sandkings trying to find someone else to protect.

PS. 'Elia and the kids' are dead, dying at the same time as Aerys.

And Willem Darry is a good man and true, but not of the KG. So he is irrelevant to their vows. If Viserys is the King, they are ignoring their highest precedent order by leaving him to Willem Darry to protect. To say "Viserys is covered by Willem Darry" is mental pretzaling of the highest order. For their vow, which they indicate they are following, he simply doesn't count, and they say as much.

They arent going to drop the assigned mission and run off somewhere to get their next set of orders. Until ordered otherwise, a sensible soldier will stay put, fulfilling his prior orders. No one told them to ditch the T o J and try to decide where to run next. Even if Rh was dead that did not free them from their duty.

Its not to get their next set of orders. Its to fulfil their primary order, which takes precedent over all others.

All the arguing about whether R and L were married, what Elia thought of all this, if there was polygamy and all the other points of contention(aka the mental pretzeling) and the arguing that the KG would immediately break camp and start milling about (lacking further orders) once Aerys and Rhaegar died) or dash off to find Viserys (who was already covered) or run off anywhere else just dont make sense to me. They were told to do what they were doing and it would just not make sense for them to not complete the duty despite the deaths of those giving the orders. They cant teleport to Viserys, and he is fine anyway. Much more practical to keep on task until told otherwise by whoever becomes king. Or die trying.

"Practical" is mental pretzaling. Practical is not relevant. They have vows. Either thay are following them or not, and they indicate that they are.

They have permanent standing orders (they wouldn't be milling about and they aren't lacking) and they indicate that they are following them to Ned. The only way they can be following them is for the King to be at ToJ.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh really? Then this part of the thread should have died long ago. <G>

1. They have to obey the king. If he sends them to the crown prince to fight the war, the crown prince can order them around. If he isnt actually speaking actual orders, they ought to do what needs to be done to serve the mission. He can order them thousands of leagues away to protect anyone as long as he is not left alone. The crown prince can order KG to protect a lowborn bastard thousands of leagues away if some of the KG are there. Jaime was with the King. The King ordered everyone else to march to battle under Rhaegar. Rhaegar sent 3 to T o J (unless Aerys sent them there, no hint of that) and there were 3 left to fight with him, fetch armies, etc. When they both died, their job was not to stop the mission in the middle and start running around like sandkings trying to find someone else to protect, besides, Elia and the kids had Jaime to watch them and Willem was taking care of Viserys and his mom. They arent going to drop the assigned mission and run off somewhere to get their next set of orders. Until ordered otherwise, a sensible soldier will stay put, fulfilling his prior orders. No one told them to ditch the T o J and try to decide where to run next. Even if Rh was dead that did not free them from their duty.

All the arguing about whether R and L were married, what Elia thought of all this, if there was polygamy and all the other points of contention(aka the mental pretzeling) and the arguing that the KG would immediately break camp and start milling about (lacking further orders) once Aerys and Rhaegar died) or dash off to find Viserys (who was already covered) or run off anywhere else just dont make sense to me. They were told to do what they were doing and it would just not make sense for them to not complete the duty despite the deaths of those giving the orders. They cant teleport to Viserys, and he is fine anyway. Much more practical to keep on task until told otherwise by whoever becomes king. Or die trying.

See post 389, 393 and 396. It's not up to them to decide what is more practical; their vows bind them to be with the king, and the condition is considered fulfilled if at least ONE of them does so. Therefore, they don't need to quit following Rhaegar's orders, as long as ONE of them makes for Dragonstone to Viserys. It does not matter that it is far, or dangerous journey, or that the presence of a single KG might not change a thing: this is what they all swore to do, and there is no escape and no excuse from that. If not a single ONE of them goes to Viserys, they are all oathbreakers, not fulfilling their duty... unless Viserys is not king, in which case they needn't bother and they are keeping their vows, as they point out to Ned, by staying at ToJ and guarding the real heir.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, she's the only woman. Which is another notable fact. Bran says Ned placed her there because he loved her. It may be just as likely he placed her there in recognition of her position as a princess of Westeros.

No she's not. Other Stark women have been buried there, the lords are the only ones that get statues and swords to guard them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think there may be women buried in the crypts too. Ned tells Robert, "She was a Stark of Winterfell. This is her place". According to Bran, he only broke tradition in building Lyanna and Brandon a statue. Only the Kings of Winter and Lords of Winterfell are supposed to have them.

I know that the Wiki isn't gospel, but it says that the crypts were reserved for the Kings in the North and the Lords of Winterfell. I can't remember where, but I'm sure that I read that the crypts were only for them. I think that Ned put Lyanna there because she told him that she was Rhaegar's wife, which would have made her even more of a "royal" than a King in the North. What else could Ned tell Robert? He needed to keep the peace and protect Jon, and keep his promise to his sister. If Brandon died after Rickon he would have been a Lord of Winterfell, even if it was only for a moment. What other story could Ned have told Bran? Bran was just a little kid.

Just my opinion. It sounds good to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The vows of the KG mean nothing same as the vows of the NW. People who say those vows matter and people differ. One man is very different from another, even the same person can act differently under different conditions. There are noumerous occasions in the books where members of the KG and NW break/broke their vows repetedly. For example a knight's vows can conflict with a KG vow, so whose to say which one any particular individual will follow? It's only up to him. I don't understand why people are so inflexible when comes to the KG priority issue when there are many examples of the KG history pointing to the other direction.

And people saying that Ser Gerold's response is a reference to the KG vow is open to interpetation.

“Ser Willem Darry is fled to Dragonstone, with your queen and Prince Viserys. I thought you might have sailed with him.”

“Ser Willem is a good man and true,” said Ser Oswell.

“But not of the Kingsguard,” Ser Gerold pointed out. “The Kingsguard does not flee.”

“Then or now,” said Ser Arthur. He donned his helm.

We swore a vow,” explained old Ser Gerold."

I believe he speaks of a different vow and there is no way to know for sure. I don't belive it's a coincidence that these 3 KG were there. Why isn't Selmy or Jaime? They were the 3 Rhaegar knew he could trust. It wasn't for their fighting abilities, for 3 no matter how gifted are not an army. If Rhaegar wanted to guard his son and wife he would have left at least a small garrison but he only left 3 men, the ones he could trust to follow his orders regardless of their vows. Keep in mind that Rhaegar meant to overthrow Aerys. When he planned this he must have had some of the KG support.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...