R+L = J v 38

[Lady Green]

As a matter of interest do you think Jon (assuming he survives) will be that interested in sticking around at the NW vows or otherwise? I mean he's literally been stabbed in the back by his 'brothers' and has been offered Winterfell by Stannis if he backs him. It's a pretty big incentive to jump ship.

I honestly think he would still want to hold to his NW vows, I think that's very important to him. Also he's not going to get backed by Stannis because he doesn't feel right burning the Godswood, no matter what his real family that is still his religion. However it could be considered that the NW doesn't let him back in.

[Bear Island Bruiser]

I honestly think he would still want to hold to his NW vows, I think that's very important to him. Also he's not going to get backed by Stannis because he doesn't feel right burning the Godswood, no matter what his real family that is still his religion. However it could be considered that the NW doesn't let him back in.

Yeah quite possibly. Afterall a knife in the back is one else of a redundancy notification.

[Lady Green]

Yeah quite possibly. Afterall a knife in the back is one else of a redundancy notification.

Even then though, Jon would want to stay, that's who he is. I can't imagine that he'll want to abandon the fight against the Others. Unless he stays at the Wall as a free man of course.

If he is a free man then he better go steal Val!

[Twinslayer]

It may come a point where the Others are destroyed and the NW is needed no more, then Jon can legally leave and become King. There are others that believe his 'death' will absolve him of his vows. (I am not one of them).

Yeah, if Jon's "death" absolves him of his vows to the Night's Watch, won't also eliminate any claim he might have to the Iron Throne (through Rhaegar) or to be King in the North (through Robb's will and/or through Lyanna)? I don't see how he could be dead for purposes of the Night's Watch vows but not dead for purposes of the succession.

[Queen of Procrastination]

I am relatively new to this board, so forgive me if this has been mentioned before.

When i first read agot i thought it was a safe assumption that ned had named jon snow after his mentor, jon arryn. But if jon is indeed rhaegars offspring, perhaps rhaegar chose the name before he died, and named the boy after his good friend, jon connington. Seems plausible...

This has been argued before. Some people think that Jon was named after Jon Con others think Ned named him after Jon Arryn. The thing is that we don´t know how close Jon Con and Rhaegar really were. Jon Con´s memories of Rhaegar were subjective. Maybe Rhaegar did not like Jon Con as mutch as he remembers.

There is also the speculation that Jon´s parents gave him a Targaryen name, but Ned later changed it into Jon, because people would have asked questions if "his bastard" had a Targaryen name.

I'm very much into the theory (gut feeling + reading the amazing evidence tread)

but I'd like to have your thoughts on who will get us closer to the truth?

Who's still alive and close enough to tell the tale?

I mean, who would have the trust, the means, and could tell it, WHY would they tell just now?

And does it really matter that they tell?

Ofcours in the whole 'Jon will be the heir (if he recovers/lives)' blablabla it matters, but would he truly abandon the wall?

Ned might not be his father, but he grew up with his values: Vows must not be broken, no matter what.

O please note I'm not being demeaning, I just want to point out that this has been a secret for o so many years, most people that mattered are dead. What could be the reason for who to reveal?

Anyhow, shoot! ^_^

(PS: personally, I'd be a little disappointed if Jon isn't a dragon and direwolf)

Just, because Jon is half Targaryen he must not end up one the Iron Throne he could also refuse it.

To your other question why people should reveal it.

Bran might learn it through the Weirwood network and he knows that Jon wants to learn who his parents are, so he would tell Jon if they met.

Arya knows from Edric Dayne that Wylla was Jon´s wetnurse. She might tell Jon about it and Jon could ask Wylla (I doubt that this will happen.

Dany comes to Westeros and conquers the 7 Kingdoms, North wants to stay independet she says know and then HR comes and says Jon has a better claime than you have (hoping that Jon would allow them to stay independent).

Many other possibilities

[Lady Green]

Yeah, if Jon's "death" absolves him of his vows to the Night's Watch, won't also eliminate any claim he might have to the Iron Throne (through Rhaegar) or to be King in the North (through Robb's will and/or through Lyanna)? I don't see how he could be dead for purposes of the Night's Watch vows but not dead for purposes of the succession.

As I said I am not one that believes that. I also don't believe that Jon is dead.

There is precedence though of the Council offering to absolve life long vows to become King, in Maester Aemon, so in the end that isn't a long shot, though I think the only reason Jon would become King is so that he could order everyone to fight the Others.

[Lady Green]

This has been argued before. Some people think that Jon was named after Jon Con others think Ned named him after Jon Arryn. The thing is that we don´t know how close Jon Con and Rhaegar really were. Jon Con´s memories of Rhaegar were subjective. Maybe Rhaegar did not like Jon Con as mutch as he remembers. There is also the speculation that Jon´s parents gave him a Targaryen name, but Ned later changed it into Jon, because people would have asked questions if "his bastard" had a Targaryen name.

This is what I suspect happened, or maybe not even a Targ name, just a name that it would have made no sense for him to be called.

[FittleLinger]

I am relatively new to this board, so forgive me if this has been mentioned before.

When i first read agot i thought it was a safe assumption that ned had named jon snow after his mentor, jon arryn. But if jon is indeed rhaegars offspring, perhaps rhaegar chose the name before he died, and named the boy after his good friend, jon connington. Seems plausible...

It has been mentioned yes, but there are really strong points against.

1. Jon is confirmed to be named by Ned

2. Even if Rhaegar had chosen a name, why would Ned care and/or know (You don't conceal an identity by fulfilling such wishes)

3. Rhaegar didn't feel the same towards Connington as Connington did towards Rhaegar

4. Rhaegar's first two children were Aegon and Rhaenys, it could be considered that maybe he was expecting a girl, Vysenia (to replicate Aegon I and his sisters).

5. Even if he somehow knew it would be a boy, the names of his other children suggest the name would be more Targaryen.

6. Finally, it only makes sense that Ned's first two boys are named after his best friends - Robert and Jon (Arryn).

[Budj]

Even then though, Jon would want to stay, that's who he is. I can't imagine that he'll want to abandon the fight against the Others. Unless he stays at the Wall as a free man of course.

If he is a free man then he better go steal Val!

Arguably he has, haha. Keeps her in a tower guarded by a giant...silly Jon.

[Lady Green]

Arguably he has, haha. Keeps her in a tower guarded by a giant...silly Jon.

Excellent, I don't normally want two characters together as much as I want Jon and Val to be! Val always struck me as being someone attracted to powerful men, to leaders, and she does seem to like Jon, maybe an indication that he's more powerful than he thinks (either in a Warg way or in a Royalty way).

[Twinslayer]

As I said I am not one that believes that. I also don't believe that Jon is dead.

There is precedence though of the Council offering to absolve life long vows to become King, in Maester Aemon, so in the end that isn't a long shot, though I think the only reason Jon would become King is so that he could order everyone to fight the Others.

Yeah, I agree. I can see ways in which Jon could leave the Watch and make a claim to one of the thrones, e.g., when Ned executes the deserter at the beginning of AGOT, he does it in the name of King Robert, not in the name of the Night's Watch -- so I don't see why a king could not "pardon" someone for deserting. And I don't see why, in the absence of a king, the council couldn't do it, as you suggest.

But if Jon gets out of the Watch on the grounds that he "died," I think he'd have to recognize that his claim to any throne has also died.

[Lady_wolf]

It may come a point where the Others are destroyed and the NW is needed no more, then Jon can legally leave and become King. There are others that believe his 'death' will absolve him of his vows. (I am not one of them).

hmm not a big fan of the dead-and-returning again. As for the wall destroyed, It is a huge thing :P

Don't think that Jon would want to go south. He's a northman, whatever might happen, his duty lies in the North.

[Bear Island Bruiser]

It has been mentioned yes, but there are really strong points against.

1. Jon is confirmed to be named by Ned

2. Even if Rhaegar had chosen a name, why would Ned care and/or know (You don't conceal an identity by fulfilling such wishes)

3. Rhaegar didn't feel the same towards Connington as Connington did towards Rhaegar

4. Rhaegar's first two children were Aegon and Rhaenys, it could be considered that maybe he was expecting a girl, Vysenia (to replicate Aegon I and his sisters).

5. Even if he somehow knew it would be a boy, the names of his other children suggest the name would be more Targaryen.

6. Finally, it only makes sense that Ned's first two boys are named after his best friends - Robert and Jon (Arryn).

Yeah I find it seriously doubtful that Rhaegar would name any of his kids Jon (assuming he is Rhaegar's son). It's pretty clearly a Ned name.

Besides which if Rhaegar was going to name his kids after his mates he'd be naming them Arthur Dayne first off, if not maybe after a member of the KG he respected like Gerold Hightower. You know the kid would have a name of a combination of Dayne and Gerold....besides we know Jon can't be Rhaegar's kid. After all he looks nothing like the Targaryeans and he got burnt. We all know that Targaryeans are fire proof......

:drunk:

[Ygrain]

Yeah, if Jon's "death" absolves him of his vows to the Night's Watch, won't also eliminate any claim he might have to the Iron Throne (through Rhaegar) or to be King in the North (through Robb's will and/or through Lyanna)? I don't see how he could be dead for purposes of the Night's Watch vows but not dead for purposes of the succession.

Yeah, I agree. I can see ways in which Jon could leave the Watch and make a claim to one of the thrones, e.g., when Ned executes the deserter at the beginning of AGOT, he does it in the name of King Robert, not in the name of the Night's Watch -- so I don't see why a king could not "pardon" someone for deserting. And I don't see why, in the absence of a king, the council couldn't do it, as you suggest.

But if Jon gets out of the Watch on the grounds that he "died," I think he'd have to recognize that his claim to any throne has also died.

???Why should his death and resurrection affect his claim to the throne? That one is passed down by blood lineage and he will be the son of R+L dead or alive, whereas his NW membership holds only till he dies, therefore can be perceived as terminated by his death.

[Lady Green]

???Why should his death and resurrection affect his claim to the throne? That one is passed down by blood lineage and he will be the son of R+L dead or alive, whereas his NW membership holds only till he dies, therefore can be perceived as terminated by his death.

Because by law his reign would end at death and be passed onto the next in line, in the case of L+R=J that would be Dany.

But I don't think Jon is dead, or that him dying and being resurrected will be how/if he leaves the NW.

Someone once mentioned that the vows of celebacy, wearing no crown and taking no wife came later in the life of the NW, so theoretically he could be King and member of the NW.

[FittleLinger]

Yeah I find it seriously doubtful that Rhaegar would name any of his kids Jon (assuming he is Rhaegar's son). It's pretty clearly a Ned name.

Besides which if Rhaegar was going to name his kids after his mates he'd be naming them Arthur Dayne first off, if not maybe after a member of the KG he respected like Gerold Hightower. You know the kid would have a name of a combination of Dayne and Gerold....besides we know Jon can't be Rhaegar's kid. After all he looks nothing like the Targaryeans and he got burnt. We all know that Targaryeans are fire proof......

:drunk:

Don't even joke with the fireproof thing :D

And yes, I have also found Gerold Dayne's name and looks interesting, but Martin has confirmed he is too old to be anyone but himself.

[Lady_wolf]

This has been argued before. Some people think that Jon was named after Jon Con others think Ned named him after Jon Arryn. The thing is that we don´t know how close Jon Con and Rhaegar really were. Jon Con´s memories of Rhaegar were subjective. Maybe Rhaegar did not like Jon Con as mutch as he remembers.

There is also the speculation that Jon´s parents gave him a Targaryen name, but Ned later changed it into Jon, because people would have asked questions if "his bastard" had a Targaryen name.

Just, because Jon is half Targaryen he must not end up one the Iron Throne he could also refuse it.

To your other question why people should reveal it.

Bran might learn it through the Weirwood network and he knows that Jon wants to learn who his parents are, so he would tell Jon if they met.

Arya knows from Edric Dayne that Wylla was Jon´s wetnurse. She might tell Jon about it and Jon could ask Wylla (I doubt that this will happen.

Dany comes to Westeros and conquers the 7 Kingdoms, North wants to stay independet she says know and then HR comes and says Jon has a better claime than you have (hoping that Jon would allow them to stay independent).

Many other possibilities

Wellll I agree with the fact that he musn't need to be king, that's not my point at all.

As in for the why part: I thought Bran too, through his weirwood, but in my vision, he stays forever with the children, so he has the knowledge. Arya, she would tell him because she loves him, though Arya isn't someone who'd know first hand. Not a reliable source.

Why part you're saying all is because they love him, I'm talking about people their elder.

Like f.i. Selmy, he's old, he was at court (though at that moment at the trident, i know), he knew the people involved.

That's what I want to know.

Selmy is ofcours in my opinion not someone that knows, he says himself that Rhaegar never trusted him. So why would he know.

Jon cunnington was trusted but was too far away.

Varys, might have heard whispers, but what of them..

That's what I want to hear your thoughts about, who was in place, who could know!

[Lady_wolf]

+ I forgot to mention Reed. He might know, but why would he want to get involved? This is a matter of the south, the crannogmen hardly deal with it.

[Bear Island Bruiser]

Don't even joke with the fireproof thing :D

And yes, I have also found Gerold Dayne's name and looks interesting, but Martin has confirmed he is too old to be anyone but himself.

I know but the trouble maker in me loves chucking in the favourite wind up bits. The whole oh Darkstar = Aegon/Rhaegar one is something I love.

Seriously though Jon can get burnt so he can't be a Targaryean. Now I never heard of Donal Noye getting burnt despite being a blacksmith!!! He must be a secret Targaryean!

[The guy from the Vale]

Not sure if you're joking, BIB, but I call :bs: anyway.