J. Stargaryen Posted July 10, 2013 Share Posted July 10, 2013 Jon is not the son of Rheagar, he is the son of Eddard. Its an awful theory and will not come true.You make a convincing case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nami Posted July 10, 2013 Share Posted July 10, 2013 Why would Ashara leave her entire life behind by faking her death all for a Targaryen kid? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J. Stargaryen Posted July 10, 2013 Share Posted July 10, 2013 Why would Ashara leave her entire life behind by faking her death all for a Targaryen kid?It's admirable of you, but I suspect that attempting to reason with this individual is a waste of time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Icefyre Posted July 10, 2013 Share Posted July 10, 2013 I've been waiting for someone to bring this up . I've been reading so many of these posts and w/ knowledge from the books it seems to me that even if the whole R+L=J theory is legit Lord Snow would still be considered a bastard. I mean Rhaegar was married to Elia & Lyanna was betrothed to King Bob which is what made their 'relationship' such a scandal in the first. What would it matter if he's the Bastard of Winterfell vs the Bastard of Dragonstone, unless of course having the blood of the dragon would implicate him in one of these prophecies?You're forgetting a pretty significant missing piece to the plot, which where has Robb's will gone? I personally believe Rhaegar and Lyanna were indeed married and the fact that the Targs have indulged in poly marriage more than once in Westeros definitely makes it possible that Rhaegar also married Lyanna, the problem is it's gonna be pretty hard to prove Rhaegar and Lyanna were married so even if R+L=J is indeed revealed everyone would still consider him to be a bastard until they got valid documented proof that states otherwise.....Surprise, surprise here comes Robb's will which fully legitimizes Jon as a legal Stark that GRRM decided to make the readers aware of in ASOS only to never speak of it again for some strange reason :rolleyes: ...So guess what ? Now that Jon is revealed to be Lyanna and Rhaegar's 'bastard' the fact that he's still a bastard with the same amount of Stark blood he would have had as Ned's bastard means that he's still fully eligible to be legitimized as a legal Stark and Robb's heir of North, therefore turning Jon into a legal Stark with Targ blood. The criticism that the North wouldn't accept Jon because he would have Targ blood is ridiculous when you consider his mother would be Lady Lyanna Stark of fuckin Winterfell, ya I think the North would forgive the Targ part based on the fact that Jon's mother is Lyanna, their former Lord Eddard Stark took Jon under his wing and raised him as his own, and their former fucking King Robb had enough trust in Jon to legitimize him and make him his heir in his will.....Btw During the War of the Usurper the reason Robert Baratheon was named king over any other rebel commander was because he was the only one on the rebel side who had Targ blood, so Jon as a legal Stark based on Robb's will who's has Targ blood through his father Prince Rhaegar, could still make the same play for the Irone Throne that Robert did, if he really wanted to..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stannis Lives Posted July 11, 2013 Share Posted July 11, 2013 Your forgetting a pretty significant missing piece to the plot, which where has Robb's will gone? I personally believe Rhaegar and Lyanna were indeed married and the fact that the Targs have indulged in poly marriage more than once in Westeros definitely makes it possible that Rhaegar also married Lyanna, the problem is it's gonna be pretty hard to prove Rhaegar and Lyanna were married so even if R+L=J is indeed revealed everyone would still consider him to be a bastard until they got valid documented proof that states otherwise.....Surprise, surprise here comes Robb's will which fully legitimizes Jon as a legal Stark that GRRM decided to make the readers aware of in ASOS only to never speak of it again for some strange reason :rolleyes: ...So guess what ? Now that Jon is revealed to be Lyanna and Rhaegar's 'bastard' the fact that he's still a bastard with the same amount of Stark blood he would have had as Ned's bastard means that he's still fully eligible to be legitimized as a legal Stark and Robb's heir of North, therefore turning Jon into a legal Stark with Targ blood. The criticism that the North wouldn't accept Jon because he would have Targ blood is ridiculous when you consider his mother would be Lady Lyanna Stark of fuckin Winterfell, ya I think the North would forgive the Targ part based on the fact that Jon's mother is Lyanna, their former Lord Eddard Stark took Jon under his wing and raised him as his own, and their former fucking King Robb had enough trust in Jon to legitimize him and make him his heir in his will.....Btw During the War of the Usurper the reason Robert Baratheon was named king over any other rebel commander was because he was the only one on the rebel side who had Targ blood, so Jon as a legal Stark based on Robb's will who's has Targ blood through his father Prince Rhaegar, could still make the same play for the Irone Throne that Robert did, if he really wanted to.....Yup. Exactly right. The will is everything. Pay attention to the parallels in the show. Small details that are replicated in the show have big meaning. GRRM and the producers are making sure that the pieces fall in the right place for future seasons. That will legitimizes Jon and makes him King in the North. He has an even better claim than robert for the throne though. He is the child of the crown prince. I don't think the Targ storyline will have much to do with Jon. I think the mixture of targ and stark will have meaning but not for the iron throne. The iron throne is a red herring. Who cares who sits on the iron throne when it's the battle for the dawn. The rise of AA, the Others, and the Dragons are FAR more important than the nonsense going on with Cersei, Varys etc. There is an epic battle brewing for SURVIVAL. It's like wondering who will be President of the US in the upcoming elections while the entire world is destroyed through nuclear war. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Victarion10 Posted July 11, 2013 Share Posted July 11, 2013 Why would Ashara leave her entire life behind by faking her death all for a Targaryen kid?Her brother died for this child and the love of his parents maybe? Maybe GRRM hasn't relieved this yet. Why didn't Eddard think of Jon after Roberts death? His first thoughts were crowning Stannis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J. Stargaryen Posted July 11, 2013 Share Posted July 11, 2013 Her brother died for this child and the love of his parents maybe? Maybe GRRM hasn't relieved this yet.Why didn't Eddard think of Jon after Roberts death? His first thoughts were crowning Stannis.Why would Ned think of Jon when Robert died? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobbybuilderton Posted July 11, 2013 Share Posted July 11, 2013 Her brother died for this child and the love of his parents maybe? Maybe GRRM hasn't relieved this yet.Why didn't Eddard think of Jon after Roberts death? His first thoughts were crowning Stannis.Not thinking to crown Jon is hardly proof of anything. If Jon is a Targaryen he is still either a bastard, or if Rhaegar and Lyanna wed secretly, his family was still deposed when Robert took the throne. Stannis was legally the rightful king. Even if Jon WAS the one he wanted to crown, he was already at the wall with the intention of giving up any claim to the throne/lands/titles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Icefyre Posted July 11, 2013 Share Posted July 11, 2013 Her brother died for this child and the love of his parents maybe? Maybe GRRM hasn't relieved this yet.Why didn't Eddard think of Jon after Roberts death? His first thoughts were crowning Stannis.Umm idk maybe because Ned is a man of honor who takes his vows seriously therefore didn't consider Jon to be an option for the Iron Throne seeing as though Jon was a man of the NW now sworn to hold no lands or titles? Also just because Robert was dead, that didn't mean Jon would have been any safer as the son of Rhaegar, because Stannis, Renly, and the Lannisters would still want the son of Rhaegar just as dead as Robert would....The Targs were Usurped by the Baratheons and again Ned is a man of honor, which means technically Stannis would still be the rightful king seeing as though the Baratheon were still the 'royal' family. Not to mention Ned was pretty busy trying to find a way to deal with Cersei Lannister. Once Ned is captured and he actually has some peaceful time to himself to think, he does indeed think about Jon, and they way he thinks about Jon in the specific context also suggested that Jon was not his son..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J. Stargaryen Posted July 11, 2013 Share Posted July 11, 2013 Umm idk maybe because Ned is a man of honor who takes his vows seriously therefore didn't consider Jon to be an option for the Iron Throne seeing as though Jon was a man of the NW now sworn to hold no lands or titles? Also just because Robert was dead, that didn't mean Jon would have been any safer as the son of Rhaegar, because Stannis, Renly, and the Lannisters would still want the son of Rhaegar just as dead as Robert would....The Targs were Usurped by the Baratheons and again Ned is a man of honor, which means technically Stannis would still be the rightful king seeing as though the Baratheon were still the 'royal' family. Not to mention Ned was pretty busy trying to find a way to deal with Cersei Lannister. Once Ned is captured and her actually has some peaceful time to himself to think, he does indeed think about Jon, and they way he thinks about Jon in the specific context also suggested the Jon was not his son.....Right. Let's not forget that it was Tywin who had Aegon and Rhaenys murdered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobbybuilderton Posted July 11, 2013 Share Posted July 11, 2013 I've only just realized this person only has 8 posts. It is possible that he or she hasn't had the abundance of supporting evidence laid out for them... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Icefyre Posted July 11, 2013 Share Posted July 11, 2013 Right. Let's not forget that it was Tywin who had Aegon and Rhaenys murdered.Exactly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Icefyre Posted July 11, 2013 Share Posted July 11, 2013 I've only just realized this person only has 8 posts. It is possible that he or she hasn't had the abundance of supporting evidence laid out for them...Ya but it's the tone of this person's posts that have become a problem lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobbybuilderton Posted July 11, 2013 Share Posted July 11, 2013 Ya but it's the tone of this person's posts that have become a problem lol.Yeah, I get that. But the tone might change if they read the article that makes a very good case for it. If you haven't, Victarion10, read this http://towerofthehand.com/essays/chrisholden/jon_snows_parents.htmlThere really is no reason to not acknowledge that it is one of the most likely possibilities, unless a person lacks basic reasoning skills. There is a lot of evidence for it. It affecting the story or not isn't something that is important to the question of if it's logically sound.ALSO, Howland Reed wouldn't be the only one who can find out. Bran or anyone else with his abilities might be able to find out, through the eyes of the weirwoods. Arya said there was one at Harrenhal. If the northerners find out a son of Ned Stark is alive and is a warg (something they would not laugh at or doubt as much as the southerners might), they would totally get behind whatever he says. If he claims he saw a conversation between Rhaegar and Lyanna through the heart trees, all he really has to do is warg Summer and tell some people to have a conversation at a nearby tree, then repeat back to them what they said while they were there. That'd probably be enough for them to trust him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Victarion10 Posted July 11, 2013 Share Posted July 11, 2013 Ya but it's the tone of this person's posts that have become a problem lol.I just don't think that GRRM would hint at this for so long for it to be so meaningless when it is revealed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Icefyre Posted July 11, 2013 Share Posted July 11, 2013 Yup. Exactly right. The will is everything. Pay attention to the parallels in the show. Small details that are replicated in the show have big meaning. GRRM and the producers are making sure that the pieces fall in the right place for future seasons. That will legitimizes Jon and makes him King in the North. He has an even better claim than robert for the throne though. He is the child of the crown prince. I don't think the Targ storyline will have much to do with Jon. I think the mixture of targ and stark will have meaning but not for the iron throne. The iron throne is a red herring. Who cares who sits on the iron throne when it's the battle for the dawn. The rise of AA, the Others, and the Dragons are FAR more important than the nonsense going on with Cersei, Varys etc. There is an epic battle brewing for SURVIVAL. It's like wondering who will be President of the US in the upcoming elections while the entire world is destroyed through nuclear war.Agreed, and while I've said numerous times that I'm personally really not a fan of Dany and Jon ending up together, I do admit that it's a very real possibility. Furthermore, when Dany has the vision of the Iron Throne being covered with snow, while it could have simply been a sign that she will arrive in Westeros during the winter(which has come), it could just as easily have been a warning to her that when it's all said and done the true 'throne' will lie in the North..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Icefyre Posted July 11, 2013 Share Posted July 11, 2013 I just don't think that GRRM would hint at this for so long for it to be so meaningless when it is revealed.Jon would be the product of the union between fire(Rhaegar) and ice(Lyanna), which many ppl believe to be crucial to the AA/TPTWP prophecies....So if it turns out that Jon is AA or TPTWP how would his parentage be meaningless? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stannis Lives Posted July 11, 2013 Share Posted July 11, 2013 Agreed, and while I've said numerous times that I'm personally really not a fan of Dany and Jon ending up together, I do admit that it's a very real possibility. Furthermore, when Dany has the vision of the Iron Throne being covered with snow, while it could have simply been a sign that she will arrive in Westeros during the winter(which has come), it could just as easily have been a warning to her that when it's all said and done the true 'throne' will lie in the North.....Ha. Never thought of that one. I like it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Icefyre Posted July 11, 2013 Share Posted July 11, 2013 Ha. Never thought of that one. I like it.Haha I knew you'd like it. :thumbsup: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobbybuilderton Posted July 11, 2013 Share Posted July 11, 2013 I just don't think that GRRM would hint at this for so long for it to be so meaningless when it is revealed."I don't see how that revelation might affect anything" =/= "That revelation will not affect anything"We can't judge a theory by the possible consequences we can think of. We aren't writing the story. The only thing we can do is ask if it makes sense or if there are holes in the reasoning. I see people who do this a lot, and it's somewhat amusing. The impact of the revelation or how it could be worked into the story is the author's thing. As it stands right now, I don't know how (or if) it would be made public knowledge or how it would affect the other characters choices. However, that doesn't inhibit me from looking at the facts given and coming to a conclusion from those facts. Being able to see what comes next/who reveals it/what it means for the story should have no impact on accepting a theory or not; all of those things are the author's job. If we want to do all of that, we might as well write the dang books ourselves... In what way does the argument "it would amount to nothing" affect if it's true or not? That's just how I see it, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.