R+L=J v.41

[Blackfyre the Bold]

Sorry. Rhaegar's orders explains why the 3 KG initially stayed at the ToJ, but it does not explain why they are still there when Ned arrives. They go out of their way to let Ned know they are still upholding their vows ("We swore a vow") not "We're still following orders".

Furthermore, Ned's exchange with the KG tells us that the KG were very well informed with what had happened at KL, so paragraphs 2 and 3 fail.

ETA: Ned went to the ToJ to get his sister, not to get the KG to 'bend the knee'...

Allow me to put your rebuttal to sleep before I myself close my eyes kiddo.

We swore a vow, as in we're KG for life, as in we don't bend the knee. Not much to explain there. As for the rest, meh. He clearly tells them everywhere he went he was looking for them. He was looking for them on the Trident, he wondered where they were when he found Aerys and Jaime and when he didn't see them at Storm End he thought about them again. Yup, he definitely went to the ToJ looking for them. Maybe with the hope that Lyanna was there. Maybe it wasn't to get them to bend the knee but he went there for them, for sure.

[Dragonfish]

Why do people think Jon is the rightful king? When Robert won the throne, House Baratheon became the new royal house. If a Targaryen is to become king, they would have to usurp it because they have no current claim.

That depends on your point of view. Some would look at the Targaryens regaining the throne as the restoration of the rightful rulers. Others would look at it as the usurpation of the current legitimate rulers. It's not really accurate to say that the Targaryens "lost" their claim when they lost the throne, because claim itself is often in the eye of the beholder.

Also back to the Jon = king, how does Jon being a bastard born by Rhaegar make him king? His mother was a 16 year old noble daughter, not the queen (or a queen). They weren't married ( unless the imaginary septon which so many point to "married" them in "secret" ) so he ironically is still a bastard even if his father was the crown prince instead of Lord of WF

Most believe he's legitimate because Rhaegar and Lyanna married. And they wouldn't have needed a septon for it, if they used a northern gods ceremony.

[Dragonfish]

We swore a vow, as in we're KG for life, as in we don't bend the knee.

No, they say they never flee. We know of only one situation in which the Kingsguard are duty-bound to never flee, and that is when they are protecting the king.

[Winds of Winter blow cold]

Why do people think Jon is the rightful king? When Robert won the throne, House Baratheon became the new royal house. If a Targaryen is to become king, they would have to usurp it because they have no current claim. The funniest thing is that Dany thinks that Westeros is hers by right even though her ancestor conquered it even though the 7 kingdoms had governed themselves with many kings for thousands of years. The Targaryens ruled for less then 300. I wish the end of the series has all the kingdoms go back to rule themselves and the iron throne dissolved.

Also back to the Jon = king, how does Jon being a bastard born by Rhaegar make him king? His mother was a 16 year old noble daughter, not the queen (or a queen). They weren't married ( unless the imaginary septon which so many point to "married" them in "secret" ) so he ironically is still a bastard even if his father was the crown prince instead of Lord of WF

Because sometimes when a usurper falls, the 'old order' returns. Examples are like when Oliver Cromwell died the British Royals came back, a more timely example is King Juan Carlos of Spain taking the throne after Franco died.

If Jon were a bastard, unlikely, but then King guard wouldn't be there if that were the case.

[Blackfyre the Bold]

Except that the Kingsguard say they are upholding their vow, so this argument doesn't really work.

Does it? Re-read what the Kingsguard say. "And now it begins." Do those sound like the words of men who believe their deaths are inevitable?

Viserys wasn't king until after the Sack, at which point the Kingsguard at the ToJ were the only ones left besides Jaime and Barristan, who were in enemy custody. And the fact that those Kingsguard who did remain did not seek Viserys out is the whole point. It's what supports the idea that Viserys was never really king. This is quite possibly the silliest argument I've ever heard from someone attempted to debunk the theory that Jon was born legitimate.

Go read the dialogue again. They say their upholding their vow right after they say the KG do not flee. Right after. What is there vow? And their vow isn't the same thing as their duty. So I don't know why we're still harping on this "vow" thing. Besides, they could have well told Rhaegar, "I vow to protect your child". Or is that not the way you want the word vow to be used?

And now it begins......the last fight, yup.

[Jon Icefyre]

Oh, and I really hate to talking about this whole "he was or wasn't legitimate" thing but, there were no KG (including the other--not Dayne, Whent, Hightower, Selmy, Lannister) sent to protect Viserys. A KG member isn't always with the King. Keep that in mind.

Idk how many times people have to explain there was no KG with Viserys because Viserys was never the king. Just because Ned found Lyanna in "a bed of blood" that doesn't neccesarily mean he found her literally moments after she gave birth. They seemed to be under man at the TOJ so Lyanna could have simply just been bedridden(as other women have been in the series after giving birth) from giving birth to Jon in the weeks prior to Ned finding her, and because they were under man her condition might have lingered on longer than it normally would have if she had the proper staff/resources a noble lady of her status would have normally had. The qoute from Ned in GOT stating Lyanna was "clinging on to life" suggests that she was holding on not willing to die as if she was waiting for something/someone and I highly doubt that something/someone was a dead Rhaegar, get where i'm goin with this yet? The three KG might have known the R+L child was a boy weeks prior to Ned even getting there, which would explain why in their eyes they were justified in staying as they were with the true king aka Jon Snow.

[Dragonfish]

Go read the dialogue again. They say their upholding their vow right after they say the KG do not flee. Right after. What is there vow?

Read my above post. I've already answered this "counter-argument."

Besides, they could have well told Rhaegar, "I vow to protect your child". Or is that not the way you want the word vow to be used?

If they were referring to some other personal vow that they made to Rhaegar, and they were following this vow over their vow to protect the king, then it wouldn't make much sense for them to highlight their honor as Kingsguard, would it?

[Winds of Winter blow cold]

Go read the dialogue again. They say their upholding their vow right after they say the KG do not flee. Right after. What is there vow? And their vow isn't the same thing as their duty. So I don't know why we're still harping on this "vow" thing. Besides, they could have well told Rhaegar, "I vow to protect your child". Or is that not the way you want the word vow to be used?

And now it begins......the last fight, yup.

The difference is the the KG vow to protect the King is their 'oath of office'...their "prime directive"...their "constitutionally prescribed duty".

[Zupoleon]

Allow me to put your rebuttal to sleep before I myself close my eyes kiddo.

We swore a vow, as in we're KG for life, as in we don't bend the knee. Not much to explain there. As for the rest, meh. He clearly tells them everywhere he went he was looking for them. He was looking for them on the Trident, he wondered where they were when he found Aerys and Jaime and when he didn't see them at Storm End he thought about them again. Yup, he definitely went to the ToJ looking for them. Maybe with the hope that Lyanna was there. Maybe it wasn't to get them to bend the knee but he went there for them, for sure.

Past your bedtime, kiddo? Ned is SURPRISED to find them there, as in he WASN'T EXPECTING to find them there, as in he was there to rescue his sister.

[Techelles]

I think it's a bit naive to say "a KG member must always be with the king to fulfill the vow". We've seen countless examples of characters forsaking their vows, acting on their own volition, whether for good or bad, right or wrong. Vows can be broken and words are wind. If you can consider my theory and acknowledge that in my scenario it would make more sense for the KG to stay and fight together (especially since it was 3 vs 7) if R+L had a better chance of survival escaping with someone else, then you can see why they would make the more logical decision. They were in Dorne, in the mountains! Arthur Dayne is from Dorne. If any of the 3 KG were to take R+L, in my scenario, it would be him as he would be familiar with the region. But Arthur Dayne, sworn member of the KG, isn't fleeing to Dorne with a baby in tow. Nuh uh. Those "vows" are until death. And he's not in Jon Connington position where he can disguise himself and the boy prince. Nuh uh, not in Dorne and it is well known he was Rhaegar's best friend. Hey, Ser Arthur, who is the father of that baby? Being that he was so close to home Arthur Dayne could have had someone that he entrusted to take baby R+L. It is not farfetched. That's what a best friend would do. Thus, bringing me back to my theory, the 3 vs 7 fight was a distraction. That entire scene stinks of 300 Spartans. Why would 3 men fight 7. No matter how good the KG were, this is war and those aren't good odds. Even the dialogue gives the impression that their deaths were inevitable. "The Kingsguard do not flee....No, this is the end....with a sadness in his eyes?" Ned, why are you sad? Cause this battle is unnecessary.

Oh, well, if they were in the mountains... :rolleyes:

Repeating the phrase "words are wind" is meaningless. Hightower, Whent, and Dayne were not oathbreakers. You'll never get anywhere with that argument. You know how I know? They died at the tower with the word "vow" on their lips. And you still haven't told me who they sent the baby away with. Some random friend of Arthur Dayne's? I didn't see him. Nothing in the text points to him or to anyone absconding with the child. We didn't see a baby either, you say? Yet many things in the text point to it. (Bed of blood, for instance.)

And I require that you answer my original question: Do you think this baby escaped and that it's still out there? Because if it is, then you have a lot of questions to answer about Jon Snow. If it isn't, then it means that Ned just caught up to the escape party down the road. What's the point of throwing that little detail in there? It wouldn't have any effect on the story.

We're looking for the scenario that best explains everything: the characters' behavior, the timeline, the narrative, the buildup, the clues about Jon. Finding the baby down the road adds nothing; finding no baby destroys the narrative cohesion without replacing it with anything meaningful.

Furthermore, I have no clue what you're talking about when you ask if I think the KG would have been more useful playing doctor. You say you would expect Ned to come in and order Wylla to take the baby out of the room; so my theory is exaggerated and there is "nothing that strains credulity" yet you can just say something like that? You can just insert Wylla......But my theory is exaggerated and there is "nothing that strains credulity". You know what that sounds like? "You're argument is invalid cause it has no proof and my argument is valid.......even though it has no proof." THAT'S WHAT IT SOUNDS LIKE.

Well, let's go back and look at what you said:

There are a lot of things I find unlikely. We know there was someone with Howland Reed when he entered the room and found Ned with Lyanna. So what does that mean? When Ned walked into the room it was just Lyanna there with her newborn child? So what, the KG was there to protect Rhaegar's child (instead of being with him on the Trident or with his dad at King's Landing) yet they left Lyanna unattended, bleeding on her deathbed with a baby in the room so they could confront Ned and his company? That doesn't seem very sensible to me. Assuming the person that enters the room with Howland Reed is the midwife or maester (considering only Howland and Ned survived the fight), why would she or he leave Lyanna unattended WITH A NEWBORN, even for a second? Lyanna was lying in a bed of blood and died shortly after Ned arrives so it's very likely whoever delivered her baby knew she was on the verge of dying. So leaving a dying Lyanna alone with a newborn seems careless and very unlikely.

You seemed to balk at the idea that the KG would have left Lyanna and her baby unattended in the tower while they went out to fight Ned. That's what I was talking about. As if the KG should have fought Ned at Lyanna's bedside so one of them could have mopped her brow or changed the baby's diaper mid-fight, if need be. As if it's inconceivable that the KG would ever have left Lyanna's room or gone outside the tower if the baby had truly been there.

And I suggested that Wylla might have been in the room only because, again, you expressed incredulity regarding the notion that Lyanna might have been in there unattended. You seemed to be assuming, for whatever reason, that it was impossible for the midwife to be with Lyanna and the baby if the KG were outside. Really, though, what room she was in is not important (although I do think it's more likely that the midwife was with Lyanna and that Ned would have wanted to be alone with his sister when he found her).

But yes, I do think Wylla was at the tower. We know for a fact that at least one person besides Lyanna and the KG was at the tower, and the most likely candidate for this person, given Lyanna's condition, is a midwife. And the most likely candidate for a midwife is Wylla, because Wylla is the name that Ned gives Robert and that Edric Dayne gives Arya. Also, Wylla being at the tower explains how she was in on the secret of Jon's birth. (It's very obvious from Edric's story that there is some woman at Starfall named Wylla claiming to be Jon Snow's mother.) If she didn't know, we'd have to assume that Ned brought her in on it after he'd made his promise to Lyanna, which would have been very out of character for him considering that he didn't even tell his own wife. Promise me, Ned. Is he going to tell some servant and not his wife? Wylla already knew, so Ned chose to make her part of his cover story. Her presence at the tower also gives Ned additional reason to go to Starfall.

So my suggestion (Wylla) is consistent with everything that we know about the situation and the characters involved. Can't say the same for yours. This is literature: proof is in the hints, the context, the characters, the symbols, the structure of the narrative. Also, CAPITAL LETTERS.

Oh, and I really hate to talking about this whole "he was or wasn't legitimate" thing but, there were no KG (including the other--not Dayne, Whent, Hightower, Selmy, Lannister) sent to protect Viserys. A KG member isn't always with the King. Keep that in mind.

As long as you keep in mind that all the KG except a severely wounded and captured Barristan Selmy and those at the ToJ were dead by the time Viserys would have been king (Jaime doesn't count for obvious reasons).

So yes, at least one KG is always with the king.

[Jon Icefyre]

Allow me to put your rebuttal to sleep before I myself close my eyes kiddo.

We swore a vow, as in we're KG for life, as in we don't bend the knee. Not much to explain there. As for the rest, meh. He clearly tells them everywhere he went he was looking for them. He was looking for them on the Trident, he wondered where they were when he found Aerys and Jaime and when he didn't see them at Storm End he thought about them again. Yup, he definitely went to the ToJ looking for them. Maybe with the hope that Lyanna was there. Maybe it wasn't to get them to bend the knee but he went there for them, for sure.

I don't think he went there "looking" for them, but I think it's definitely possible he expected to see them. Look this wasn't the shitty, no honor bound, KG of current Westeros these KG were the real deal badasses. I mean Arthur Dayne was considered by most including Ned to be as deadly as deadly gets. So it's not a stretch to think that when Ned is about to get into a potential battle confrontation with the Targ loyalists he expects to see those kg who were renowned warriors and it's seems pretty often that in medieval battles in general people are always on the lookout for the renowned warriors. It doesn't mean they are neccesarily pursuing them it just means they would like to be aware of their presence on the battlefield or wherever. So when Ned doesn't see them with the other Targ loyalists in multiple places it comes as a shock to him. So after Ned lifted the seige of Storm's End with no KG in sight, I'm sure he expected to see those last three KG either at the TOJ or Dragonstone/escaping with Viserys. It's not really looking for them in the sense of a pursuit, it's more of expecting them using your common sense. Although Ned might have been expecting to see at least one of the three kgs at TOJ, his travel to the TOJ was 100% about Lyanna.

[Techelles]

One, that would leave only 2 of them to fight and like they made clear the KG "do not flee". Two, Ned tracked them all the way to the ToJ to get them to bend the knee (they are KG after all), if one of them got away he would track them just the same; leading him straight to R+L.

1) I can't imagine why you think that the "do not flee" clause of the KG vow is more important than the whole "protect the king" thing. Or that they aren't one and the same, for that matter.

2) Ned went to the tower for Lyanna, not the KG. Lyanna. If he'd already found her in the ToJ, there's no reason to think he would have chased after a KG who no longer posed a threat for no other reason than to force him to "bend the knee." Nobody chased after Viserys and Dany. He would follow, of course, if he thought that one of the KG fled with Lyanna's child. But the only person who would tell Ned about such a child is Lyanna herself, who would have stayed at the tower no matter what the KG did or where the baby went. So it's not like Ned would only have known to go after the child if one of the KG had gone with it, meaning we can't use fear of leading Ned to the baby as an explanation for why at least one KG didn't go with it.

Sure, if the baby fled and all three KG stayed, they'd have a better chance of winning the fight and preventing Ned from seeing Lyanna in the first place. But then we have the problem with broken vows again. Also, if talking to Lyanna meant that Ned would have known to go after the baby anyway, then I'm not sure the baby would have been any safer on the road with a few servants than at the tower with the KG.

[Dr. Pepper]

Go read the dialogue again. They say their upholding their vow right after they say the KG do not flee. Right after. What is there vow? And their vow isn't the same thing as their duty. So I don't know why we're still harping on this "vow" thing. Besides, they could have well told Rhaegar, "I vow to protect your child". Or is that not the way you want the word vow to be used?

And now it begins......the last fight, yup.

Yes, Rhaegar's orders are likely what brought them to the TOJ and caused them to stay when he went off to fight on the Trident. But Rhaegar's orders are meaningless when the king (who ordered them to follow Rhaegar's orders) has died.

Perhaps if you look at this another way it will make sense. Let's say instead of Aerys ordering the KG to go report to Rhaegar, he ordered them to stand on one leg and pick their nose. Would you expect them to continue following that order even after Aerys died?

[Jon Icefyre]

1) I can't imagine why you think the "do not flee" clause of the KG vow is more important than the whole "protect the king" thing.

Agreed when the KG say they "do not flee" I get the impression that they mean they "do not flee" in situations that invlove protecting the king/heir, which is what most of us R+L=J believers on here seem to think that situation was precisely.

[Techelles]

Agreed when the KG say they "do not flee" I get the impression that they mean they "do not flee" in situations that invlove protecting the king/heir, which is what most of us R+L=J believers on here seem to think that situation was precisely.

Yes indeed. That occurred to me after I posted, so I threw in an edit. Not that our good friend Blackfyre is getting the point. :bang:

Oh well.

[Ygrain]

And that would be a violation of their oaths which they were adamant they were not doing. One of them would have had to go with the baby because at least one KG had to be with the king.

To play the devil's advocate a bit: I did suggest some time ago that the KG might have stuck to the spirit of the vow and protect Jon by not being with him, i.e. not advertising his existence by having the famous KG around. Not letting anyone near Lyanna so as not find out that she had given birth would have been crucial in that plan, as well. However, this scenario would be just a rather unimportant variation, as it changes nothing about R+L= legit J, the premises of the KG oath etc.

All this talk about legitimacy is getting old. The KG were at the ToJ because Rhaegar wanted them to be there. From all accounts Rhaegar was well respected, amongst the lords of Westeros, nobles, common folk and the KG (especially). We know Arthur Dayne was Rhaegar's closest friend so it comes as no surprise that he was loyal to Rhaegar and accepted whatever order he was given as justified and right. Hightower was sent by Aerys to find Rhaegar and bring him back to King's Landing so we don't know what his motivation for staying at the ToJ could have been, same goes for Whent.

So to address the talks about why the KG wasn't defending the King as is their duty, well, their king would have been Aerys. Would they have known that Aerys was dead? Let's say they did know, then their king would have Rhaegar. Would they have known that Rhaegar was dead? Let's say they did know, then their king would have been Aegon. Would they have known Aegon was dead? Let's say they did know, then their king would have been R+L (assuming Lyanna gave birth to a boy). If you think taking a chance and fighting Ned and company, even though the odds were stacked against them, is a better idea than secretly sending R+L away with someone else then I don't have a reply bruh. You could argue that at least one of the KG could went with R+L, but I have two problems with that. One, that would leave only 2 of them to fight and like they made clear the KG "do not flee". Two, Ned tracked them all the way to the ToJ to get them to bend the knee (they are KG after all), if one of them got away he would track them just the same; leading him straight to R+L.

To say the KG should have gone to Dragonstone to protect Viserys, "the king", is assuming a lot. We don't know how caught up they were in regards to what was happening on the Trident or in King's Landing. So my answer to why they were there is simple, they loved, respected, trusted and obeyed Rhaegar.

No. Hightower himself makes it very clear that their KG duty is above any personal preferences; following Rhaegar's orders because they loved and respected him when their primary duty required them to do something else would be oathbreaking, plain and simple. Yet, they claim that they are upholding their vows and emphasize several times that they are Kingsguard. Now, what is the primary purpose of Kingsguard? To obey orders, to guard the royal family, to fight to the death? Yes - as long as it doesn't clash with their primary purpose to guard the King.

BTW

, Whent has been confirmed as being on Lyanna's "kidnapping" since the very beginning, so he was probably at ToJ from day one.

Why do people think Jon is the rightful king? When Robert won the throne, House Baratheon became the new royal house. If a Targaryen is to become king, they would have to usurp it because they have no current claim. The funniest thing is that Dany thinks that Westeros is hers by right even though her ancestor conquered it even though the 7 kingdoms had governed themselves with many kings for thousands of years. The Targaryens ruled for less then 300. I wish the end of the series has all the kingdoms go back to rule themselves and the iron throne dissolved.

Also back to the Jon = king, how does Jon being a bastard born by Rhaegar make him king? His mother was a 16 year old noble daughter, not the queen (or a queen). They weren't married ( unless the imaginary septon which so many point to "married" them in "secret" ) so he ironically is still a bastard even if his father was the crown prince instead of Lord of WF

There is this very ironic analogy with Dany's court ruling that the woman who abandoned her house lost the right to it - we all know that this is unjust, that your right is not void because someone took it from you by force. Everything then depends on whether you have the power to reclaim what you have lost.

As to Jon being bastard-born: this whole argumentation above basically boils down to the fact that if Jon was a mere bastard, the KG had no business hanging around ToJ, or at least not all of them (because, as Barristan tells us, it is not the purpose of KG to protect mistresses and bastards). By the account of everyone who knew him, Rhaegar was an admirable person, a paragon of virtues, Lyanna was from the family renowned for honour - would these two just elope and go on making bastards? Well, people do err, but given the polygamy precedents in the Targ lineage, it would have been a honourable way for both of them to be together.

[Queen of Procrastination]

Hate me all you want.............homegirl. Oh whoops, I forgot, too urban!

Yes, too urbban I am living in one of my countries biggest cities, but too urban. Exactly you nailed it.....NOT

Now, in regards to my theory. Anyone can read the text and find evidence to construct a theory and support it; doesn't make it true. Just like anyone can find evidence to dispute someone else's theory. The series was clearly written to allow for that. So you, or anyone else getting upset or catching feelings because someone proposes a theory that doesn't follow your line of thinking is WACK.

Yes anyone can read the text and find evidence for that theory, but you didn´t give us any evidence you just said that you didn´t believe that the child wasn´t at the TOJ. And that doesn´t make it true.

I just asked you to explain your theory so we can disscuss about it. I always present these three questions when someone comes with a new theory about Jon´s parents or the theory that Jon wasn´t in the towe, because I wan´t to see what evidence they have and how the explain for example the behavior of the KG.

I don´t hate all people who don´t agree wiht me and I don´t think that they are wack. I love it to discuss with them that´s why I visit that forum. Some people who are new to the R+L=J threads present great new insights. The Others and I agree on the main parts, but we disagree on some of the details and many other stuff. I know that Corbon and Mtn Lion have a theory with which I disagree, but I don´t hate them, no I love it to discuss with them. And there are many other things in which we disagree apart from R+L=J, but I don´t hate them. I don´t hate the people who disagree with R+L=J I. A few weeks ago somone came up with a Mance is Jon´s father theory that person showed some evidence, I liked that theory even if I didn´t believe in it, because r+l=j makes more sense, but I didn´t hate that person. I just asked you to explain your theory further and told you that I am female and don´t like it that you call me homeboy. You saw that many people found it annoying.

The one that hates the others, because they disagree with him is you. We showed you many evidences against your theory,but you still pushed it forward an refuse to believe anything else.

Oh and by the way I don´t accept your so called apology, but I don´t think that bothers you

[Winds of Winter blow cold]

Blackfyre has managed to piss everybody off! :lol:

[-Ghost-]

Waaack

[Lady Gwynhyfvar]

Umm... Time to put this one to bed? :dunno: