R+L=J v.35

[Bear Island Bruiser]

Bruiser, while I tend to believe that Lyanna died during or as a result of childbirth, in fairness to you, you are right that there are alternatives that would work. Consider:

Robert dies in a room that smells of smoke, blood and death. Cause of death: gored by boar.

Lyanna dies in a room that smells of blood and roses. Cause of death: infection (she had a fever).

So we have two people dying in rooms that smell of blood, and we know for sure in the case of Robert that he was never pregnant.

Now, there are any number of ways a person could acquire and die from an infection. The only thing Ned does not ever think about is the cause of the infection.

On the bed of blood, aside from Robert's death, there are three references I can recall to blood and beds: flowering (Sansa), maiden's blood (Lady Dustin) and childbirth (Dany).

Bloody bed, as used by MMD, almost certainly refers to childbirth. Bed of blood, or beds of blood -- the other two phrases -- might refer to childbirth, they might refer to one of the other options, or they might refer to all three.

Finally, we know that giving a person the gift of mercy would produce a lot of blood. It would also explain why Lyanna's fear went away when Ned made his promise, if Ned's promise was to provide her with the gift of mercy.

As I said, I think Lyanna gave birth and died as a result, in part because I think the bed of blood and the cause of the infection are connected. But there are other possibilities that could work.

Completely agree. It's the most likely explanation and hints are given in the text through MMD but there is nothing to show that Ned would think of the birthing bed as a bed of blood.

There is also a hint that she died through an injury. In Theon's dream at Winterfell he sees Lyanna in a white gown stained with gore. Note not blood but gore. In other references to gore in the books it tends to be through injuries caused by violence and in general this is how it's used in literature. As I said it's just a hint, and a relatively weak one at that.

[Bear Island Bruiser]

I have always believed that in order to dismiss R+L=J (a theory that can be easily supported) you would need to create theories and possibilities that have hardly any support from the text. Why do that just to discredit a perfectly supported theory? It makes no sense to me.

Because it's fun to discuss other possibilites? Becuase we're only 5 books into a 7 book series, a series where pretty much nothing is an absolute given (I mean we've seen a character have her throat slit, definitely dead and come back)? Because the point of a discussion forum is to discuss things? Because the biggest argument I've seen used by massive proponents of R+L=J against any alternative is 'but that goes against R+L=J'? Because the a discussion forum would be incredibly boring if we all just came on here and agreed? Because even with the hints that point towards R+L=J they're still just hinits? Because a lot of any of this is down to character motivation and interpretation and we all have our different views on how certain characters would react?

Anyone of those really :cool4:

[Bear Island Bruiser]

Denial? LOL

No, trolling aside, I think it all comes to Rhaegar being an elusive, controversial character and people struggling to accept him as Jon's sire.

But the power of the R+L=J story is all in its classical resonance. ASOIAF, once divested of its fantasy/medieval setup, has got a classical (greek-roman) archetypal core. Paris, Oedipus, Theseus, Aeneas, Romolus and Remus are all fate-bound (anti)heroes with highborn/prophecy-haunted/secret ancestry and an inescapable burden to carry on: their own destiny.

Jon's ancestry is just another tragic, paradoxical, archetypal trial on the way to his destiny fullfiment.

Great isn't it?

[Kosh Naranek]

I find all of the speculation on the ToJ to be fascinating, but not convicing to me personally.

My reason for not "buying" Aegon at the Tower of Joy is that I believe him to be a Blackfyre. (I may be totally wrong, but...)

1. The books specifically mention the Blackfyre line dying out on the male side. That leaves female Blackfyres running around, perfectly capable of having sons.

2. Varys' story just struck me as too pat and convenient for some reason. He foresaw the fall of the house and took pains to spirit away the next in line while replacing said heir with a wine bought baby?

3. Jon Connington's love for Rhaegar makes him the perfect mark. Jon wants Aegon to be real. He can then place the son of the man he loved back on the throne and thereby wipe out some of his guilt over failing his prince.

4. (I will confess that at first I had trouble mentally seperating the Golden Company from mentions of the Bloody Mummers/Brave Companions.) He is coming back at the head of the Golden Company, a force of men put together by Bittersteel of all people.

5. Brynden Rivers aka Bloodraven has been revealed as still alive. Who did Bloodraven fight so hard against?

Plus, I don't understand/have trouble fathoming Varys' and Illyrio's devotion to the Dragon Lords. What do those two self-made men get out of this devotion? That to me is so murky. There must be more yet to be revealed about their "devotion" and scheming. If Varys wanted a "good" ruler on the throne as his conversation with a dying Kevan suggested, why did he continue to prop up the reign of Aerys?

I was one of those fans that was not terribly invested in Jon until the stabbing. I did not love him, but I did not hate him. I considered myself more of a Ghost fangirl than anything else. I liked the Black Brothers and was intrigued by the story at the Wall. (There was Red Wedding levels of book throwing going on when Jon was stabbed though.) I cannot mentally grasp Jon actually being dead at this point in the narrative. I am convinced that he has a further part to play.

In the end, I am not convinced his parentage will be that important. I think it will be more satisfying for the fans to finally know than narrative shaking.

At this point I am having trouble fully articulating my thoughts. So, please bear with me.

I think Aegon is simply another destabilizing force sent to Westeros by a vengeful George. (Joking!) In all serious though, I don't know that Aegon's legitimacy will ultimately be what is important about him in the narrative (just like Jon). I think he has landed in Westeros to be another agent of choas. He will bring further death and deprivation. Bleak will pile upon Bleak just in time for the Wall to fall.

Jon will rise from the ashes like a Phoenix. (I think this might literally happen.) I see Jon as a stabilizing force. He was trying to put the Wall in order when killed. (He is only mostly dead.) I think he will have learned more diplomacy and hopefully will put order back in place in wake of the choas, if he survives that long.

So, that I have not totally derailed the topic -

I think that Benjen knows the whole story. I also think he is not dead. (Pretty sure this thread has revealed to be that I am more of a Stark fangirl than I thought.) I would love it if somehow it was Benjen (back from the lands of Always Winter) that told Jon, not Howland Reed.

[Lady Tippy Wolfsbane]

Although I do subscribe to R+L=J I wouldn't go so far as to say that. If GRRM decides to go with Ashara or Wylla & Ned he could very easily say that he pretty much told us from the begining that that's the way it was.

I completely disagree. If GRRM decided to convince me that Eddard Stark cheated on his wife and fathered a bastard child I would feel totally betrayed, as a reader. After an entire book used to portray Ned as the pinnacle of honor, after showing Ned making grievous mistakes in the name of honor, after reading Ned's inner monologue as it's refers to Jon and the ToJ...I would feel extremely cheated.

I agree with this and I would add that it is possible that R+L=J but that Jon is not the Targ heir either because Aegon is the heir or because Jon is not legitimate and Dany is the heir. Or both could be true -- Aegon could be first with Dany second and Jon a bastard son of either Rhaegar or Ned. GRRM can finish the story in any of these ways without contradicting anything that he has written so far.

I completely disagree. There is no other way to convince me why the Kingsguard were present at the ToJ. GRRM has gone out of his way to express the vows of the Kingsguard without giving away too much, to show us that the Kingsguard present were the best and finest, and to show us that those members were the most serious about their vows. He has give is Ned's fever dream and Jaime's. He has gone out of his way to show us a Northern wedding, and he has gone out of his way to make Jon's parentage a huge secret Why, if Jon is a bastard either way. I don't believe Jon will care either way about the throne, and I could care less about who sits the Iron Throne. I want Jon to find the truth of his parentage to finally give him some peace. And I want him to find out that he is legitimate so that he can finally feel as good as everyone else.

Contrarianism. Frankly at this point I think that's all it is.

I've tried to accept it which is why I now avoid this thread, but sometimes people go to far.

Denial? LOL

No, trolling aside, I think it all comes to Rhaegar being an elusive, controversial character and people struggling to accept him as Jon's sire.

But the power of the R+L=J story is all in its classical resonance. ASOIAF, once divested of its fantasy/medieval setup, has got a classical (greek-roman) archetypal core. Paris, Oedipus, Theseus, Aeneas, Romolus and Remus are all fate-bound (anti)heroes with highborn/prophecy-haunted/secret ancestry and an inescapable burden to carry on: their own destiny.

Jon's ancestry is just another tragic, paradoxical, archetypal trial on the way to his destiny fullfiment.

:agree:

Because it's fun to discuss other possibilites? Becuase we're only 5 books into a 7 book series, a series where pretty much nothing is an absolute given (I mean we've seen a character have her throat slit, definitely dead and come back)? Because the point of a discussion forum is to discuss things? Because the biggest argument I've seen used by massive proponents of R+L=J against any alternative is 'but that goes against R+L=J'? Because the a discussion forum would be incredibly boring if we all just came on here and agreed? Because even with the hints that point towards R+L=J they're still just hinits? Because a lot of any of this is down to character motivation and interpretation and we all have our different views on how certain characters would react?

Anyone of those really :cool4:

Your sarcasm was interesting, but unfounded. You misread my post. I'm not dumb, so I know well the point of a discussion forum. Discussion does not warrant blatant dismissal. You cannot dismiss a perfectly good theory for a theory that has no evidence whatsoever. That was the situation I was referring to. I have had great discussions with people on this board as it relates to R+L=J about alternate theories and possibilities, without them attempting to totally dismiss my theory and without me attempting to totally dismiss their theory. Alternatively, I have had some "facepalm" discussions with people that completely dismiss my theory without any logical basis. If people want to discuss alternate theories, fine. You can do that without totally dismissing the evidence that supports R+L=J. And yes, there is evidence not just hints.

Yes, everything comes down to character motivation and interpretation. GRRM has gone out of his way to show us many of these character's motivations. It's when you ignore these motivations that you come up with totally different interpretations of their actions.

Yes, we are reading a series where anything can happen. Catelyn had her throat slit and came back to life but GRRM had already given us an example of this, so we knew it was a possibility.

[Bear Island Bruiser]

I completely disagree. If GRRM decided to convince me that Eddard Stark cheated on his wife and fathered a bastard child I would feel totally betrayed, as a reader. After an entire book used to portray Ned as the pinnacle of honor, after showing Ned making grievous mistakes in the name of honor, after reading Ned's inner monologue as it's refers to Jon and the ToJ...I would feel extremely cheated.

I completely disagree. There is no other way to convince me why the Kingsguard were present at the ToJ. GRRM has gone out of his way to express the vows of the Kingsguard without giving away too much, to show us that the Kingsguard present were the best and finest, and to show us that those members were the most serious about their vows. He has give is Ned's fever dream and Jaime's. He has gone out of his way to show us a Northern wedding, and he has gone out of his way to make Jon's parentage a huge secret Why, if Jon is a bastard either way. I don't believe Jon will care either way about the throne, and I could care less about who sits the Iron Throne. I want Jon to find the truth of his parentage to finally give him some peace. And I want him to find out that he is legitimate so that he can finally feel as good as everyone else.

I've tried to accept it which is why I now avoid this thread, but sometimes people go to far.

:agree:

Your sarcasm was interesting, but unfounded. You misread my post. I'm not dumb, so I know well the point of a discussion forum. Discussion does not warrant blatant dismissal. You cannot dismiss a perfectly good theory for a theory that has no evidence whatsoever. That was the situation I was referring to. I have had great discussions with people on this board as it relates to R+L=J about alternate theories and possibilities, without them attempting to totally dismiss my theory and without me attempting to totally dismiss their theory. Alternatively, I have had some "facepalm" discussions with people that completely dismiss my theory without any logical basis. If people want to discuss alternate theories, fine. You can do that without totally dismissing the evidence that supports R+L=J. And yes, there is evidence not just hints.

Yes, everything comes down to character motivation and interpretation. GRRM has gone out of his way to show us many of these character's motivations. It's when you ignore these motivations that you come up with totally different interpretations of their actions.

Yes, we are reading a series where anything can happen. Catelyn had her throat slit and came back to life but GRRM had already given us an example of this, so we knew it was a possibility.

Fair enough. I certainly don't dismiss any theory that has a logical basis, which R+L=J certainly does and there are hints/evidence whatever you want to call it (think our difference on this is more one of semantics than judgement). My main point on this is that it's not the only theory that fits what we know of the circumstances and I tend towards the others. I admit part of that is my own desire to see it not be true as personally I feel it would be a bit of an anticlimax to a great mystery and partly because I'd prefer to see Ned with a bit more of a flaw.

This also stems from a discussion I was having with another poster who basically said that you couldn't use to the KH presence at the ToJ as proof towards the Aegon in the tower idea as it was proof of R+L=J and so it was borrowing evidence. Or I believe this so yours must be wrong. Essentially the presence of the KG shows as that it's one of two things

1. There is a king in the ToJ
   
   
2. The KG have been ordered there by a king. Either as bodyguards or jailers.
   

[Lux in Tenebris]

I completely disagree. If GRRM decided to convince me that Eddard Stark cheated on his wife and fathered a bastard child I would feel totally betrayed, as a reader. After an entire book used to portray Ned as the pinnacle of honor, after showing Ned making grievous mistakes in the name of honor, after reading Ned's inner monologue as it's refers to Jon and the ToJ...I would feel extremely cheated.

I completely disagree. There is no other way to convince me why the Kingsguard were present at the ToJ. GRRM has gone out of his way to express the vows of the Kingsguard without giving away too much, to show us that the Kingsguard present were the best and finest, and to show us that those members were the most serious about their vows. He has give is Ned's fever dream and Jaime's. He has gone out of his way to show us a Northern wedding, and he has gone out of his way to make Jon's parentage a huge secret Why, if Jon is a bastard either way. I don't believe Jon will care either way about the throne, and I could care less about who sits the Iron Throne. I want Jon to find the truth of his parentage to finally give him some peace. And I want him to find out that he is legitimate so that he can finally feel as good as everyone else.

I've tried to accept it which is why I now avoid this thread, but sometimes people go to far.

:agree:

Your sarcasm was interesting, but unfounded. You misread my post. I'm not dumb, so I know well the point of a discussion forum. Discussion does not warrant blatant dismissal. You cannot dismiss a perfectly good theory for a theory that has no evidence whatsoever. That was the situation I was referring to. I have had great discussions with people on this board as it relates to R+L=J about alternate theories and possibilities, without them attempting to totally dismiss my theory and without me attempting to totally dismiss their theory. Alternatively, I have had some "facepalm" discussions with people that completely dismiss my theory without any logical basis. If people want to discuss alternate theories, fine. You can do that without totally dismissing the evidence that supports R+L=J. And yes, there is evidence not just hints.

Yes, everything comes down to character motivation and interpretation. GRRM has gone out of his way to show us many of these character's motivations. It's when you ignore these motivations that you come up with totally different interpretations of their actions.

Yes, we are reading a series where anything can happen. Catelyn had her throat slit and came back to life but GRRM had already given us an example of this, so we knew it was a possibility.

Completely agree. There is just no way Ned is Jon's father.

[MtnLion]

Not to worry, the Kingsguard showing that Jon was legitmate, and all of the indicators that momma is Lyanna (looks and everything), and that she married daddy, Rhaegar, will always be in dispute. Even the argument will continue if Howland Reeed steps forward and says that Jon was born of Lyanna after she married Rhaegar will be in dispute, since no one will get that from his POV, and he could be lying. (Aegon still could be at the tower, and that's why the Kingsguard . . .) Even if Ned had thought it before dying, it would be in diispute, because he may have been lying to himself.

[FrozenFire3]

Not to worry, the Kingsguard showing that Jon was legitmate, and all of the indicators that momma is Lyanna (looks and everything), and that she married daddy, Rhaegar, will always be in dispute. Even the argument will continue if Howland Reeed steps forward and says that Jon was born of Lyanna after she married Rhaegar will be in dispute, since no one will get that from his POV, and he could be lying. (Aegon still could be at the tower, and that's why the Kingsguard . . .) Even if Ned had thought it before dying, it would be in diispute, because he may have been lying to himself.

:lol: This dispute reminds the age-old HP fandom debate about Snape: sinner or saint? Well, even after the BIG revelation in the last book (not so surprising for the careful reader btw) a part of the fanbase still denied him the status of tragic (anti)hero. It's the destiny of controversial characters... who most of the times happen to be the most interesting ;)

[MtnLion]

:lol: This dispute reminds the age-old HP fandom debate about Snape: sinner or saint? Well, even after the BIG revelation in the last book (not so surprising for the careful reader btw) a part of the fanbase still denied him the status of tragic (anti)hero. It's the destiny of controversial characters... who most of the times happen to be the most interesting ;)

Quite true, it is as one wishes to believe, just as Varys says. Nevermind the facts ma'am, were here to arrest that man!

[Lord Flashheart]

New to the R+L=J board just wondering if anyone has a link to get back to the original threads? I can only seem to find as far back as R+L=J v.20

[MtnLion]

New to the R+L=J board just wondering if anyone has a link to get back to the original threads? I can only seem to find as far back as R+L=J v.20

No, sorry I don't have any links that far back, and searching would indeed be fun. They may have been numbered as R + L = J 1, 2, 3, etc. early on. The addition of the v. may have come later.

[Zupoleon]

I was able to find the original thread after a couple minutes of searching some months ago. As I recall, the initial version or two did not have numbers attached, but at about v7 or so, there was a link back to the preceding threads. I'll try to find it again later and post if successful...

[SFDanny]

New to the R+L=J board just wondering if anyone has a link to get back to the original threads? I can only seem to find as far back as R+L=J v.20

The earliest of these threads I'm aware of starts in May of 2006 and is titled "The Lyanna+Rhaegar=Jon thread". I started posting in version two, so anything before this, and there is plenty before it, I'm not the person to point you to it. Some of the mods, and, of course, Ran and Linda, would know more about those earlier discussions.

edit: if you're looking for the origin of this theory, you won't find it here - it predates it by quite a bit before this site was opened. This post by A wilding gives you an idea when it may have come about.

[Bear Island Bruiser]

Not to worry, the Kingsguard showing that Jon was legitmate, and all of the indicators that momma is Lyanna (looks and everything), and that she married daddy, Rhaegar, will always be in dispute. Even the argument will continue if Howland Reeed steps forward and says that Jon was born of Lyanna after she married Rhaegar will be in dispute, since no one will get that from his POV, and he could be lying. (Aegon still could be at the tower, and that's why the Kingsguard . . .) Even if Ned had thought it before dying, it would be in diispute, because he may have been lying to himself.

:lol: Very true.

[Lady Tippy Wolfsbane]

Fair enough. I certainly don't dismiss any theory that has a logical basis, which R+L=J certainly does and there are hints/evidence whatever you want to call it (think our difference on this is more one of semantics than judgement). My main point on this is that it's not the only theory that fits what we know of the circumstances and I tend towards the others. I admit part of that is my own desire to see it not be true as personally I feel it would be a bit of an anticlimax to a great mystery and partly because I'd prefer to see Ned with a bit more of a flaw.

I feel it could possibly be anticlimactic for those that have put the pieces together, but for those that have not (I know a few) it would be a big surprise.

This also stems from a discussion I was having with another poster who basically said that you couldn't use to the KH presence at the ToJ as proof towards the Aegon in the tower idea as it was proof of R+L=J and so it was borrowing evidence. Or I believe this so yours must be wrong. Essentially the presence of the KG shows as that it's one of two things

1. There is a king in the ToJ
   
   
2. The KG have been ordered there by a king. Either as bodyguards or jailers.
   

Well, I can understand your frustration, but I do not feel that way.

I feel that the Kingsguard presence at the ToJ could only mean one thing...that a king was present. I cannot find any logical explanation for why all three of them, being Targaryren loyalist, would remain at this secluded tower while Viserys was without Kingsguard protection.

:lol: This dispute reminds the age-old HP fandom debate about Snape: sinner or saint? Well, even after the BIG revelation in the last book (not so surprising for the careful reader btw) a part of the fanbase still denied him the status of tragic (anti)hero. It's the destiny of controversial characters... who most of the times happen to be the most interesting ;)

I always thought Snape was a good guy placed it hard situations. It amazed me that people hated him so strongly!

[Twinslayer]

Essentially the presence of the KG shows as that it's one of two things

1. There is a king in the ToJ
   
   
2. The KG have been ordered there by a king. Either as bodyguards or jailers.
   

Bruiser, there is a third possibility. We know (from The Hedge Knight and other places) that the KG have to obey orders of Targ princes (in that case one not in the direct line of succession). This is why the argument that Jon must be legitimate depends so heavily on proving the (questionable) assumption that when the king dies one of the KG has to go immediately to the new king. Otherwise the KG presence at the ToJ is easily explained by saying Rhaegar told them to go there and nothing happened to relieve them of their obligation to continue following Rhaegar's order.

[Twinslayer]

I cannot find any logical explanation for why all three of them, being Targaryren loyalist, would remain at this secluded tower while Viserys was without Kingsguard protection.

I am curious whether there is a good theory to explain the answer Hightower gave Ned when Ned asked him directly why the KG were not with Viserys. Hightower basically says that they are not with Viserys because Viserys is fleeing and the KG do not flee.

Is the reason Hightower gives to Ned convincing on its own or is there more going on here?

[SFDanny]

Twinslayer, that maybe the most misused quote in this whole topic, and by that I don't mean you in particular, but in the long history of these threads. First, it does not say Viserys is fleeing. It says, when read in context, the Kingsguard trio would be fleeing if they went to Dragonstone. There is a very, very big difference. Second, what happens most often with this quote is that it is transformed into some supermacho code against ever retreating, ever running away from a battle no matter the odds. That is not what the Kingsguard is about, nor what Hightower is talking about. He says they, meaning the three Kingsguard there, will not flee from the performance of their duty - guarding their king. That is the key. The Kingsguard must be willing to never give an inch, to never run away, to sacrifice their lives in order to guard their king. The corollary here is that the Kingsguard should be willing to run away, should be willing to surrender territory or their own personal honor, if it means protecting their king. To read this otherwise is to distort what the kingsguard is all about.

[Twinslayer]

SFDanny, I am not making the 'supermacho' point. I agree with you that that argument is far-fetched (to be polite about it) so please do not ascribe it to me.

I am asking a question. Ned asks why the KG are not with Viserys and Hightower does not say "he is not the king" or "normally we guard princes too even if that means dividing our forces but there are diferent circumstances that apply here." He says that the KG would not flee to Dragonstone.

It seems to me there are several ways this could be taken. One is that the KG do not flee with princes but they would flee with a king. I am asking if there are other possible explanations for Hightower's words.

I think you are suggesting he means he would not flee with a prince if that meant leaving his king behind. If so that is one possibility. But that is a little different from saying the KG does not flee.