Jump to content

R+L = J v 38


Stubby

Recommended Posts

OK first off I hold it open as a possibility that Aegon is there. Right secondly in terms of the reasons she my previous list of possible ideas.

Possible ideas are all speculation, without motive or reason. I am asking what motive and reason would be substantial enough to support the idea, and there are none that I have seen as valid. But, it is apparent that you are conceding that the Kingsguard are guarding who they think is the king, from their statements. Your argument hinges on the fact that Aegon, if he was alive would be king, and that he mysteriously without appropriate cause, and without appropriate protection was moved to a strategically indefensible position.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

snip

Barristan recalls that Viserys had already shown signs of the madness. No one wanted him as King. Rhaegar, on the other hand, everybody loved. An infant son of Rhaegar >> than the likely going to be mad son of the Mad King.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Barristan recalls that Viserys had already shown signs of the madness. No one wanted him as King. Rhaegar, on the other hand, everybody loved. An infant son of Rhaegar >> than the likely going to be mad son of the Mad King.

Agreed on that. I was offering Twinslayer a reason why Rhaella might have proclaimed Viserys King on Dragonstone. Other than that she didn't know there were other options.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Possible ideas are all speculation, without motive or reason. I am asking what motive and reason would be substantial enough to support the idea, and there are none that I have seen as valid. But, it is apparent that you are conceding that the Kingsguard are guarding who they think is the king, from their statements. Your argument hinges on the fact that Aegon, if he was alive would be king, and that he mysteriously without appropriate cause, and without appropriate protection was moved to a strategically indefensible position.

Not at all I concede that the Kings Guard were there and that they MAY have been there to protect Aegon, who MAY have been there. Alternatively I believe they MAY have been there to protect Jon who MAY be the son of Lyanna and Rhaegar and they MAY have got married in which case he MAY be the legitimate king of Westeros. Equally I believe they MAY be there following the last orders they were given by a fallen dynasty of Kings they swore an oath to.follow. Finally I believe they may be there for an alternative reason I haven't thought of or seen espoused by someone else.

In terms of why Aegon may be at the ToJ there are in that line of reckoning I can see several possible reasons

  1. To ensure the continuation of the Targ line. The Targ seem pretty keen to keep things male dominated. I can't think of one Targ Queen taking the lead but feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. Anyway at that point there are 3 possible Targ male heirs. Rhaegar who's going into battle at some point. Skilled warrior as he is that's risky. Next you've got Viserys who's at KL with Aerys. You've also got Aegon who's at KL as well. Now safe as KL is there is always a chance it's going to fall. Even without Tywin's treachery if Robert wins at the Trident the next likely move is to put KL under siege. So they've got all their eggs in one heavily defended basket. Move Aegon out, replace him with a stand in so people think he's still there and remove him to a remote location that not many people will know about. That way even if KL falls your line continues. Aerys, Rhaegar, Varys (assuming he's a Targ loyalist) or Elia (plus a few other Targ supporters) might all want this and be in a position to do it.
  2. Aerys is a nut job and highly unpredictable. Keeping Rhaegar's family there is a way to ensure loyalty from Rhaegar, remember he's been worried about him betraying him before. Elia or Rhaegar might want to remove Aegon from his presence to safeguard him against his wrath should things turn nasty. The ToJ a building Aerys doesn't know about would be a safe place to hide him.
  3. KL was a hive of intrigue even then. Someone could have decided to remove Aegon for his safekeeping after hearing rumours (false or otherwise) that someone was making moves to harm him
  4. Pycelle was going to betray Aerys to Tywin. However he may have shown some compassion to protect Aegon knowing that Tywin would be likely to release his pretty brutal soldiers on the kids. Removing them both would be seen as too obvious but he can get one out and he may hope that they wouldn't be so brutal with a girl.
  5. After the Trident KL is the obvious place for the rebels to march on. You can't remove the whole royal family without starting a panic, look what happened when Joffrey was removed from the walls, but you can smuggle one out.

Plenty of potential reasons.a lot of speculation but as your main argument for him not being there is a question of motivation it answers that particular question.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not at all I concede that the Kings Guard were there and that they MAY have been there to protect Aegon, who MAY have been there. Alternatively I believe they MAY have been there to protect Jon who MAY be the son of Lyanna and Rhaegar and they MAY have got married in which case he MAY be the legitimate king of Westeros. Equally I believe they MAY be there following the last orders they were given by a fallen dynasty of Kings they swore an oath to.follow. Finally I believe they may be there for an alternative reason I haven't thought of or seen espoused by someone else.

In terms of why Aegon may be at the ToJ there are in that line of reckoning I can see several possible reasons

  1. To ensure the continuation of the Targ line. The Targ seem pretty keen to keep things male dominated. I can't think of one Targ Queen taking the lead but feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. Anyway at that point there are 3 possible Targ male heirs. Rhaegar who's going into battle at some point. Skilled warrior as he is that's risky. Next you've got Viserys who's at KL with Aerys. You've also got Aegon who's at KL as well. Now safe as KL is there is always a chance it's going to fall. Even without Tywin's treachery if Robert wins at the Trident the next likely move is to put KL under siege. So they've got all their eggs in one heavily defended basket. Move Aegon out, replace him with a stand in so people think he's still there and remove him to a remote location that not many people will know about. That way even if KL falls your line continues. Aerys, Rhaegar, Varys (assuming he's a Targ loyalist) or Elia (plus a few other Targ supporters) might all want this and be in a position to do it.

  2. Aerys is a nut job and highly unpredictable. Keeping Rhaegar's family there is a way to ensure loyalty from Rhaegar, remember he's been worried about him betraying him before. Elia or Rhaegar might want to remove Aegon from his presence to safeguard him against his wrath should things turn nasty. The ToJ a building Aerys doesn't know about would be a safe place to hide him.

  3. KL was a hive of intrigue even then. Someone could have decided to remove Aegon for his safekeeping after hearing rumours (false or otherwise) that someone was making moves to harm him

  4. Pycelle was going to betray Aerys to Tywin. However he may have shown some compassion to protect Aegon knowing that Tywin would be likely to release his pretty brutal soldiers on the kids. Removing them both would be seen as too obvious but he can get one out and he may hope that they wouldn't be so brutal with a girl.

  5. After the Trident KL is the obvious place for the rebels to march on. You can't remove the whole royal family without starting a panic, look what happened when Joffrey was removed from the walls, but you can smuggle one out.

Plenty of potential reasons.a lot of speculation but as your main argument for him not being there is a question of motivation it answers that particular question.

So we also have the precedent of poor, unimportant (and unlucky) children being substituted for others of "greater" importance (and luck) in order to make people think the heirs to a house have been done in: Bran and Rickon/miller's boys.

I still like the Aegon is Ashara's son possibility (substituted for Elia's stillborn daughter) but the two theories are not mutually exclusive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@BIB

  1. What examples of this from the past can you point to that make it a reasonable thing to do?
  2. True, but he seems to know that he needs to keep Elia and her children safe in order to have leverage with the Dornish spears.
  3. Now, you're making stuff up. No one is going to cross King Aerys, or Prince Rhaegar. Remember that everyone fears Aerys, and everyone loves Rhaegar..
  4. See #3
  5. Again, making stuff up. Rhaella and Viserys along with Ser Darry went to Dragonstone, no one seems to have gotten up in arms about that.

As for qualification, it is all speculation, and most of all it is unreasonable speculation. It requires a suspension of belief in the characters themselves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not the presence but what's been said, what's not been said and the fact that they go up against Ned in the first place. In that conversation there is no mention of Lyanna having a kid there OK they wouldn't necessarily have said anything about it and if they did it would pretty much destroy the mystery.

However should R+L=J be true I find the fact that they choose to fight Ned with no attempt at a discussion a bit strange, Ned is the kids uncle and despite the kids at KL being killed by Lannisters it's known that Ned is an honourable guy and that's forgetting the whole bit about kinslaying so it's extremely unlikely that he's going to harm them or allow any of his followers to harm the baby. The whole conversation says they're spoiling for a fight when they could have just let Ned talk to Lyanna. If it's Jon in there it well doesn't exactly make no sense but it makes less sense than if it were say Aegon in there or they were just following out the last orders of Aerys/Rhaegar to stay there and guard the tower from Robert's supporters.

I mean if their job is to protect the 'King' who is Jon then Ned could potentially help them a great deal. Even if they win they've just killed the 'King's' uncle.

Sure the whole thing can be twisted round to look at it from another point of view and at the end of the day they're soldiers facing an 'enemy' not statesmen opening discussions but no chat about it in there seems a bit odd.

You’re missing an important clue. While it is quite a safe bet that Ned personally wouldn’t have harmed Lyanna or her child, he still may tell Robert and endanger Jon’s life in this way. Hard to say to what extent his reputation as an honourable guy has already been established, but in this particular case, it would even be harmful: as Robert’s loyal subject, he is honour-bound to disclose the existence of Rhaegar’s heir to him, and you guess what might have followed. Jon’s future well-being relies solely on secrecy, and the KG cannot be sure what Ned’s reaction would be – even Lyanna, his sister, wasn’t sure what he would do until she extracted that promise from him.

I agree with Ygrain on this one. I don't think the KG were fighting Ned out of fear that Ned would harm Jon, they feared Robert would harm him. Look yes Ned was Jon's uncle and a very honorable man, but the fact is Ned was also Robert's closest friend and a crucial leader in the rebellion Robert's second in command coming from the KG's POV giving Jon to Ned would have been as dumb as dumb get's. Regardless of if the KG mention Jon at all or not Ned obviously would find out who Jon was if he managed to kill the KG. Even if they would have sat down on peaceful terms and let Ned talk to Lyanna he would have still most likely ended up making that promise to Lyanna as she feared for Jon's life above all else I don't think she cared about seeing him as king. Which would have still put him in contradiction with the KG as their speech clearly shows that hey had no intention of seeing Jon raised as a bastard of Ned in Winterfell they meant to raise up for Jon as Rhaegar's only living heir and king of Westeros which obviously would have been a problem for Ned. I don't think the KG let's Ned walk away with Jon regardless of what Lyanna wanted Jon was the king in their eyes and they meant to sit him on the Irone Throne.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aerion Brighflame's son was passed over because he was the infant son of a mad father in favor of Aegon V who was a grown man and "well loved." Viserys was a lad of seven, while Jon was an infant whose existence may not even have been known. For Rhaella (who may have been unaware of other plots elsewhere in the kingdom there on Dragonstone) from what she knew of her own family history, even if either the infant Jon or Aegon had survived, Viserys= best option to rally support around the Targaryen cause.

It makes sense to me that, in the case of Aerion's son, they would pass him over because he was an infant/unknown quantity, as you suggest. They would have needed some kind of legal rationale for doing this, though, and saying it was because his father was never king (as in the case of Richard the Lionheart, which I mentioned earlier) might have served that purpose.

I have been wondering what Rhaella would have done if the KG had defeated Ned at the Tower of Joy and then Hightower had gone to Dragonstone with baby Jon claiming that Jon was Rhaegar's heir. Would Rhaella have renounced her support for Viserys as king in favor of giving the crown to Jon? If not, and she wanted to continue to support Viserys, the precedent where the Great Council passed over Aerion Brightflame's son in favor of Aerion's little brother probably would have come in handy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@BIB

  1. What examples of this from the past can you point to that make it a reasonable thing to do?
  2. True, but he seems to know that he needs to keep Elia and her children safe in order to have leverage with the Dornish spears.
  3. Now, you're making stuff up. No one is going to cross King Aerys, or Prince Rhaegar. Remember that everyone fears Aerys, and everyone loves Rhaegar..
  4. See #3
  5. Again, making stuff up. Rhaella and Viserys along with Ser Darry went to Dragonstone, no one seems to have gotten up in arms about that.

As for qualification, it is all speculation, and most of all it is unreasonable speculation. It requires a suspension of belief in the characters themselves.

  1. Why does there need to be an example from the past to make it a reasonable thing to do? It makes sense as a reasonable precaution.
  2. Yep but if Rhaegar has switched sides/goes for it alone the chances are he's taking those Dornish spears with him. Plus Aerys is bat shit crazy so he may just not care or do it from spite.
  3. Well check the bit where I say false or otherwise. The point is not that someone would actually do it but that they might believe it. Rhaegar might not go for it but Aerys is a paranoid loon at this point so may see enemies everywhere.
  4. Yeah that one is a bit of a stretch but not beyond the complete realms of possibility. He may also use it as a personal back up if things don't follow through with the Lannisters. Equally it may go some way to explain why Varys killed Pycelle. To help silence a shared secret.
  5. True but surely the fact that they were moved out goes in favour of it being possible and in deed desirable to make the switch? Aegon is more important than Viserys as he would be the next king should the lords choose to stick with a Targ king, Plus as a child any regent chosen for him would have a lot of power. So too may someone brokering his return.

As for requiring suspicion of disbelief in the characters quite the reverse in some on them. OK point 4 is a bit of a change for Pycelle. Scenario 5 seems distinctly possible and may tie in with Varys' claim of the baby switch. Point 3 ties in with Aerys' paranoia, as does 2 which equally goes with Elia and Rhaeger's desire to keep their child safe. Point 1 could be tied in to about half a dozen characters and their natures and motivation.

Yeah there is speculation in there but that goes with any theory about anything in the books that have yet to be written.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@BIB I should have mentioned this before, so you wouldn't have to try so hard to find something to dispute my last. Lyanna is associated with blue flowers/roses all of the way through the books. We know that Jon is at the Wall because of Daenerys' vision of the blue flower growing from a chink in a wall of ice, and is the child that Ned gets from the tower. So, no Aegon, sorry. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It makes sense to me that, in the case of Aerion's son, they would pass him over because he was an infant/unknown quantity, as you suggest. They would have needed some kind of legal rationale for doing this, though, and saying it was because his father was never king (as in the case of Richard the Lionheart, which I mentioned earlier) might have served that purpose.

I have been wondering what Rhaella would have done if the KG had defeated Ned at the Tower of Joy and then Hightower had gone to Dragonstone with baby Jon claiming that Jon was Rhaegar's heir. Would Rhaella have renounced her support for Viserys as king in favor of giving the crown to Jon? If not, and she wanted to continue to support Viserys, the precedent where the Great Council passed over Aerion Brightflame's son in favor of Aerion's little brother probably would have come in handy.

I highly doubt she would have raised up for Viserys over Jon yes Viserys was her son, but Jon would be kin to her as well (her grandson) and Viserys was only seven, so he wasn't in that much better shape to rule than Jon. Also Rhaegar was her son as well and I think she knew Rhaeger well enough to assume he didn't kidnap Lyanna(I think even the mad king realized that). Im sure Rhaegar's close family knew how obsessed he was with that damn prophecy and Rhaegar being viewed in the legendary status that he was which seemed to be unprecedented for a crowned prince (the only person I can think of that came close was Baelor Breakspear), I think Rhaella along with the rest of the Targ supporters would have accpeted Rhaegars only living son(Jon) as the true king. I just don't think Rhaella would ever betray Rhaegar by claiming Viserys as the true king over Rhaegar's own son when Rhaegar was also her son. But that's only if they all thought Jon was legit which if he was indeed i'm sure the KG would have clearified the matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@BIB

  1. To you, perhaps, but not in the story with the people we have in the story.
  2. Rhaegar said he would return, as he expected to. If Rhaegar is going to switch sides, he is going to do it before he leaves the Red Keep. Just try to be logical.
  3. We know that he sees enemies everywhere, but he asked Rhaegar to take the army, therefore he must trust him.
  4. Varys killed Pycelle because he knew too much.
  5. This is counter to your suggestion that Aerys would make the plot. I think Aerys was partial to Viserys, at least from what little we know of their relationship. But, seriously, no one else is going to risk bringing down the wrath of the Mad King if Elia should discover her baby switched. Elia is not going to part with her child while Rhaegar is expected to return. There are too many people that would need to be involved to keep it a secret. Besides, as I pointed out, Lyanna’s child is currently cooling his heels (and maybe more) at the Wall (of ice).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To ramble off along a tangent, I somehow wonder why there are some people who hate R+L=J with such a passion. Right now, it has not played into the story one bit. Yes, it might in the future, and I expect it will (Law of the Conservation of Detail and all that jazz), but there's no way to be sure. So why the hatred of that idea?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To ramble off along a tangent, I somehow wonder why there are some people who hate R+L=J with such a passion. Right now, it has not played into the story one bit. Yes, it might in the future, and I expect it will (Law of the Conservation of Detail and all that jazz), but there's no way to be sure. So why the hatred of that idea?

Dragon envy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@BIB

  1. To you, perhaps, but not in the story with the people we have in the story.

  2. Rhaegar said he would return, as he expected to. If Rhaegar is going to switch sides, he is going to do it before he leaves the Red Keep. Just try to be logical.

  3. We know that he sees enemies everywhere, but he asked Rhaegar to take the army, therefore he must trust him.

  4. Varys killed Pycelle because he knew too much.

  5. This is counter to your suggestion that Aerys would make the plot. I think Aerys was partial to Viserys, at least from what little we know of their relationship. But, seriously, no one else is going to risk bringing down the wrath of the Mad King if Elia should discover her baby switched. Elia is not going to part with her child while Rhaegar is expected to return. There are too many people that would need to be involved to keep it a secret. Besides, as I pointed out, Lyanna’s child is currently cooling his heels (and maybe more) at the Wall (of ice).

  1. Well we're going to have to agree to disagree on that one. Personally I read it as something that a few of the characters would do. To chuck in another factor on this one what happens if they run him to KL at about the same time that Viserys is run to Dragonstone? At this point it makes sense to split them up, just as Osha did with Bran and Rickon. They take Viserys publicly to Dragonstone so all eyes are on him. Aegon is then taken to ToJ. At this point they need somewhere secret, it's a good secret place. Plus there are 3 KG there who will guard him.
  2. Yeah he's going to come back but who's he bringing with him? Again it's the fear of Aerys that's driving this and an understanding that he's err a bit tempremental
  3. Well whether he did trust Rhaeger completely or not is another matter but it might not be him he's paranoid about
  4. Yeah but what did he know too much about? Well a whole load of things. I completely admit this one is more than a little shaky
  5. Well Varys claims to (yeah not too sure about that one) but there's also the idea that Elia could well be in on the plot. In fact if there was an Aegon switch at all I'm pretty sure she'd have to be. You can fool a few people with a double from a far but not the mother up close.

In terms of the blue rose at the wall first off if it does symbolise Jon is Lyanna's son this doesn't actually disprove that Aegon was there, just that Jon is her son. This would then make it likely that Jon was at the ToJ, equally could have been at Starfall and that's why Ned goes there to pick up Jon but I digress. Even if Jon is Lyanna's son and was at the ToJ none of it disproves that Aegon wasn't.

Equally whilst I'll give you the blue rose is a major hint at L+R=J I'd say that prophesy and the imagery in it is tough to interpret.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To ramble off along a tangent, I somehow wonder why there are some people who hate R+L=J with such a passion. Right now, it has not played into the story one bit. Yes, it might in the future, and I expect it will (Law of the Conservation of Detail and all that jazz), but there's no way to be sure. So why the hatred of that idea?

I've often wondered on this as well to be honest. I don't know, I like Martin surprising me (yep, I didn't catch it at first) and I don't really see the big deal. I liked Jon before I found out and my opinion on Jon hasn't changed even one bit after I did. It was an, "Ah ha! So that's the deal, let's see how this plays out" moment for me. It maybe a character trait, ot maybe even something I've learned from these books, namely - don't expect anything/expect anything, if you're catching my drift.

I've recently seen people cling to some minor and ridiculous theories and not willing to leave them even when disproved directly (say, by an SSM or the app), I guess some people just don't like change :P

Maybe it's me, maybe I'm just watching too much real-life crime stories, so I've learned to go with the evidence even if it doesn't fulfill my initial expectations (not that I have any in that particular case, I was just so enthralled with the story).

So yes, I can kind of see people who maybe have had stronger opinions and expectations on what's going on, but after those 5 books, even if read once, haven't we learned that it's not about "what we want and like". And yes, to your point, I don't even see what's not to like here. It just hasn't played out in any way yet.

And this comes from me, who you can freely label as a Targ hater.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Equally whilst I'll give you the blue rose is a major hint at L+R=J I'd say that prophesy and the imagery in it is tough to interpret.

Tough to interpret are you serious lol? Dude just let it go, what other realistic possible explanation could there be for the blue rose other than Jon being Lyanna's son? I'll give you the answer to that, there is no other logical explanation other than a reader's stubborn denial/refusal to believe Jon is Lyanna's son.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tough to interpret are you serious lol? Dude just let it go, what other realistic possible explanation could there be for the blue rose other than Jon being Lyanna's son? I'll give you the answer to that, there is no other logical explanation other than a reader's stubborn denial/refusal to believe Jon is Lyanna's son.

Well, in all fairness, there is a theory that the blue rose is connected with Bael the Bard, that both Lyanna and Alys Karstark are descended from Bael, and that the HoTU vision presages Alys' arrival at the Wall in ADWD. Not that I necessarily embrace that theory (and I do believe that Jon is the son of Rhaegar and Lyanna), but I think it shows that GRRM likes to have more than one possible explanation for each of these clues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, in all fairness, there is a theory that the blue rose is connected with Bael the Bard, that both Lyanna and Alys Karstark are descended from Bael, and that the HoTU vision presages Alys' arrival at the Wall in ADWD. Not that I necessarily embrace that theory (and I do believe that Jon is the son of Rhaegar and Lyanna), but I think it shows that GRRM likes to have more than one possible explanation for each of these clues.

Yes but what connection would Bael the Bard/Alys arrival at the wall have with Dany's vision of the blue rose in terms of relating to Dany's past/future?? This is exactly my point, the fact that Dany sees the blue rose on the wall wouldn't make since unless there was a connection with her, Jon being her blood and the possible true Targ heir/king of westeros forms that connection. Yes there are other possible explanations as you pointed out but they are unrealistic at best, just a shallow and weak tactic used by readers to refute R+L=J.

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...