R+L=J v.55

[The guy from the Vale]

Sorry if this has been already discussed, but I really don't want to go through 55 threads to check it out.

Despite my initial disbelief, I have come to accept R+L=J. But I still don't buy the polygamy stuff.

Rheagar never thought he would die in the Trident. And he surely never thought his children with Elia would be slayed, because in his mind, they were 2 of the 3 heads of the dragon.

Wouldn't it be far easier to just legitimize Jon when he was born? Aegon would still be the first in sucession. And having a legitimized bastard with no claim over Aegon's would be much more acceptable to the rest of the kingdom, than Reaghar having a second wife. Specially when she was already destined to Robert.

We know that only the King can legitimize a bastard. But even if Aerys was against this, Rheagar would just have to wait until Aerys was dead to do it himself. Which would be probably within the time needed for Jon to grow up and become indeed one head of the dragon.

Some will say that the Kingsguard duty is to guard the king and his family. Yes it is. But that doesn’t mean the boy was king.

Arthur Dayne is said to have been one of Rheagar's best friends. He probably knew all about his intention to legitimize Jon (assuming it to be true). So, they were initially guarding a to-be-legitimized bastard. On top of that, all the Lyanna thing was about giving birth to the third head of the dragon! I don’t think that the Kingsguard, specially Dayne, thought Rheagar just had the hots for Lyanna, They knew about his belief that the child would fulfill a prophecy, They knew that he would be the third head of the dragon, PtwP, etc, etc.

So, as they hear all the Targaryes are dead except for Viserys and Dany, and that the war is lost, they have to make a decision for themselves. They can just say: Rheagar was crazy, there is no such thing as three heads of a dragon. This child is a bastard that won’t even be legitimized anymore. Let’s leave him to die.

Or they can say: hey, there are only two targaryens left in this world and the only chance of a third one is right here in this tower. And they surely will need a three-headed dragon to reconquer the continent again, since this war is completely lost. Let’s save the child and then meet the King Viserys somewhere where we can reach him (not dragonstone!).

As for the “we swore a vow”, I don’t see how fulfilling the legendary prophecy and enabling the reconquering of Westeros isn’t protecting the king and his family.

No, it wouldn't be easier to legitimize Jon. He'd have to convince Aerys for that, the very Aerys who killed Lyanna's family and was increasingly paranoid. And there's no way to make sure Aerys didn't pull a Liz II and just stayed alive for another 50 years.

You also have to keep in mind that if he didn't marry Lyanna, Rhaegar would have dishonored her - quite the opposite to what little we know of his character.

[Maxpey]

No, it wouldn't be easier to legitimize Jon. He'd have to convince Aerys for that, the very Aerys who killed Lyanna's family and was increasingly paranoid. And there's no way to make sure Aerys didn't pull a Liz II and just stayed alive for another 50 years.

You also have to keep in mind that if he didn't marry Lyanna, Rhaegar would have dishonored her - quite the opposite to what little we know of his character.

:agree: I am not a huge fan of Rhaegar, but being honorable does appear to have been a virtue of his.

[Morienthar]

No, it wouldn't be easier to legitimize Jon. He'd have to convince Aerys for that, the very Aerys who killed Lyanna's family and was increasingly paranoid. And there's no way to make sure Aerys didn't pull a Liz II and just stayed alive for another 50 years.

You also have to keep in mind that if he didn't marry Lyanna, Rhaegar would have dishonored her - quite the opposite to what little we know of his character.

He was planning a coup,He could have legitimized Jon himself.

[Ygrain]

Sorry if this has been already discussed, but I really don't want to go through 55 threads to check it out.

Despite my initial disbelief, I have come to accept R+L=J. But I still don't buy the polygamy stuff.

Rheagar never thought he would die in the Trident. And he surely never thought his children with Elia would be slayed, because in his mind, they were 2 of the 3 heads of the dragon.

Wouldn't it be far easier to just legitimize Jon when he was born? Aegon would still be the first in sucession. And having a legitimized bastard with no claim over Aegon's would be much more acceptable to the rest of the kingdom, than Reaghar having a second wife. Specially when she was already destined to Robert.

We know that only the King can legitimize a bastard. But even if Aerys was against this, Rheagar would just have to wait until Aerys was dead to do it himself. Which would be probably within the time needed for Jon to grow up and become indeed one head of the dragon.

Some will say that the Kingsguard duty is to guard the king and his family. Yes it is. But that doesn’t mean the boy was king.

Arthur Dayne is said to have been one of Rheagar's best friends. He probably knew all about his intention to legitimize Jon (assuming it to be true). So, they were initially guarding a to-be-legitimized bastard. On top of that, all the Lyanna thing was about giving birth to the third head of the dragon! I don’t think that the Kingsguard, specially Dayne, thought Rheagar just had the hots for Lyanna, They knew about his belief that the child would fulfill a prophecy, They knew that he would be the third head of the dragon, PtwP, etc, etc.

So, as they hear all the Targaryes are dead except for Viserys and Dany, and that the war is lost, they have to make a decision for themselves. They can just say: Rheagar was crazy, there is no such thing as three heads of a dragon. This child is a bastard that won’t even be legitimized anymore. Let’s leave him to die.

Or they can say: hey, there are only two targaryens left in this world and the only chance of a third one is right here in this tower. And they surely will need a three-headed dragon to reconquer the continent again, since this war is completely lost. Let’s save the child and then meet the King Viserys somewhere where we can reach him (not dragonstone!).

As for the “we swore a vow”, I don’t see how fulfilling the legendary prophecy and enabling the reconquering of Westeros isn’t protecting the king and his family.

Except what theguyfromthevale has already said, there is this whole aspect of the KG vows - no matter what they may have thought about Rhaegar's intentions, there is no explanation why the paragons of knighthood were not doing what they were sworn to do (guard the king, which would be Viserys at that moment) while repeatedly emphasizing that they were KG and keeping their vows.

He was planning a coup,He could have legitimized Jon himself.

This still doesn't cover the dishonour to Lyanna, though. Why dishonour the woman he supposedly loved if he possessed the means to make it right since the very beginning?

[The guy from the Vale]

He was planning a coup,He could have legitimized Jon himself.

But legitimizing bastards is something that just isn't done unless there's the need for it in Westeros. And the Targs in particular have a rather... bad history with legitimized bastards.

Also, musing Rhaegar's plans is moot anyway. The KG (particularly Hightower, who is portrayed as a stickler) wouldn't abandon Viserys unless he wasn't king, and Bloodraven wouldn't call Jon "king" either unless he was actually, you know, the Targ king.

ETA: Ygrain is a ninja :D

[Morienthar]

This still doesn't cover the dishonour to Lyanna, though. Why dishonour the woman he supposedly loved if he possessed the means to make it right since the very beginning?

Maybe he was expecting Elia to bite it and then marry Lyanna,I don't know we don't have enough data to come to a conclusion either way.

[Maxpey]

But legitimizing bastards is something that just isn't done unless there's the need for it in Westeros. And the Targs in particular have a rather... bad history with legitimized bastards.

Also, musing Rhaegar's plans is moot anyway. The KG (particularly Hightower, who is portrayed as a stickler) wouldn't abandon Viserys unless he wasn't king, and Bloodraven wouldn't call Jon "king" either unless he was actually, you know, the Targ king.

ETA: Ygrain is a ninja :D

I don't understand why you would say the Targs had a bad history with legitimized bastards. It's not like they caused devastating civil wars . . . oh wait, never mind! ;)

[Morienthar]

But legitimizing bastards is something that just isn't done unless there's the need for it in Westeros. And the Targs in particular have a rather... bad history with legitimized bastards.

Also, musing Rhaegar's plans is moot anyway. The KG (particularly Hightower, who is portrayed as a stickler) wouldn't abandon Viserys unless he wasn't king, and Bloodraven wouldn't call Jon "king" either unless he was actually, you know, the Targ king.

ETA: Ygrain is a ninja :D

Yes Yes I know I sometimes argue for the sake of it,I find it fun.

Still doesn't mean he'll end up on the throne though,So there's still hope for Jon's character.

[Ygrain]

Maybe he was expecting Elia to bite it and then marry Lyanna,I don't know we don't have enough data to come to a conclusion either way.

That's gross :-(

Besides, it would be just postponing the decision, as by the time Rhaegar left ToJ, Elia was still alive and kicking and apparently not about to die any time soon.

[Ygrain]

ETA: Ygrain is a ninja :D

Ha-eeee!

[J. Stargaryen]

With regards to Jon's legitimacy, the analysis I've done on the scene at Harrenhal where Rhaegar crowns Lyanna the QoLaB appears to make a very strong case for Jon's legitimacy, in addition to what we already know.

From the link:

When I read this passage, I see an incredibly strong metaphor for the story of Jon Snow's conception. Assuming my interpretation is correct, I believe it constitutes some of the best R+L=J evidence out there. Here's what I mean.

The story of Jon's conception (re: the metaphor) begins when Rhaegar urges his horse past Elia, but I'm not going to start there. I want to start with the last part describing the crown. It's a crown of blue winter roses. This is important to understand because I believe that blue winter roses symbolize Jon Snow. Now, not fundamentally important to the theory, but interesting to note, is that the logical continuation of this metaphor - that is, a crown of blue winter roses - hints at Jon's royal blood and/or his royal future the same way a crown of golden lions would for a Lannister, or a crown of silver trout would for a Tully.

Okay, now back to the beginning. Like I was saying, the 'story' begins when Rhaegar urges his horse past Elia. This act mirrors his later romantic snub of her. In both cases he does so in favor of Lyanna. In other words, he twice chooses Lyanna Stark over his own wife; first when naming the QoLaB at Harrenhal, and then when he makes off with her for the ToJ.

The first choice is made when Rhaegar lays the queen of beauty's laurel in Lyanna's lap. An act which seems to simultaneously predict and confirm R+L=J. The item itself and its placement seem highly suggestive to me. The aforementioned crown of blue winter roses - aka, Jon Snow - is placed in his mother's lap. You guys know where babies come from, right? So if what I've said above is correct, the metaphor seems to say that Rhaegar spurned Elia in favor of Lyanna. He then placed Jon Snow in Lyanna's lap womb.

For bonus points, the description of the crown as a 'laurel' works as a clue that Rhaegar and Lyanna were married. The word laurel literally describes the crown, while it figuratively represents honor. The notion of Rhaegar honoring Lyanna by placing Jon Snow in her lap probably contradicts the idea of Jon's bastardy. If not, giving birth to Jon Snow could turn out to be a tremendous honor, provided his character turns out to be the king/hero/messiah figure he's in line to be. Again, not necessarily of fundamental importance, but something worth noting.

Additional analysis:

I think one aspect of this theory that I haven't really emphasized, possibly because I just take it for granted, is that the blue rose symbolism often hints at, or points to some of the same things we think have happened, or think will happen. Because those things are predicted and/or hinted at by other theories, thereby adding credibility to both, or all.

In the analysis for "the moment when all the smiles died," I pointed out that the version of the word laurel that is used means honor, or honors won. As far as I can tell, there are two different plausible readings of this line, though the most likely interpretation is a combination of both, imo:

1. Rhaegar crowned Lyanna in order to acknowledge her deeds as the Knight of the Laughing Tree, or;
   
2. Rhaegar crowned Lyanna as a gesture of his romantic love for her.
   

Rhaegar's act of placing the crown of winter roses in Lyanna's lap was, by definition, a way of honoring her. Since he honored Lyanna by placing the crown of roses in her lap, it seems unlikely that he dishonored her when he placed Jon Snow in her "lap," according to my reading of the line. In other words, Jon's conception must have been honorable, which seems to preclude the possibility that he is R&L's bastard. Because putting a bastard in the belly of a highborn maiden is the very definition of dishonoring her. So this theory seems to be making a strong case in favor of Jon's legitimacy at birth, as honorable conception means married conception.

Even though Rhaegar did honor Lyanna when he crowned her the QoLaB, by placing the laurel in her lap, it was a controversial act. One that appears to have a symbolic parallel, if you apply my J=BR "formula" to it. So, even though Rhaegar did honor (re: married) Lyanna when he placed Jon in her lap, that act -- which necessitated Rhaegar taking a second wife -- also would have been controversial, because polygamous marriage hadn't been practiced by the Targaryens for decades, however; there was one very prominent precedent in the form of Aegon the Conqueror and his sisters. That precedent means the marriage, though controversial, was entirely legal and valid, as plural marriage was never outlawed. So In both cases, Rhaegar's method of honoring Lyanna was controversial, or surely would have been if the marriage had become public knowledge.

Are there any independent clues or theories in the story that point to Jon's legitimacy in the same way as my theory? Why yes. Quite a few, actually. Aside from the oft mentioned ToJ scene, plenty can be found in Apple Martini's well known thread, A King in Hiding: Adding It All Up and its sequel.

[Ruby Chevrolet]

Ruby, at least once, read the full passage:

And then a hot wind buffeted him and he heard the sound of leathern wings and the air was full of ash and cinders and a monstrous roar went echoing off the scorched and blackened bricks and he could hear his friends shouting wildly. Gerris was calling out his name, over and over, and the big man was bellowing, “Behind you, behind you, behind you!”

Quentyn turned and threw his left arm across his face to shield his eyes from the furnace wind. Rhaegal, he reminded himself, the green one is Rhaegal.

When he raised his whip, he saw that the lash was burning. His hand as well. All of him, all of him was burning.

Oh, he thought. Then he began to scream.

The hot wind aka furnace wind comes way before Quentyn starts to burn.

Okay, now I see why you are confused. "Hot wind" is not the same as "furnace wind." Remember, Balerion did not melt the Iron Throne (or Harrenhal, for that matter) with hot breath. He did it with furnace breath.

Suffice it to say, while Daenerys withstood Drogon's "furnace wind," I am pretty sure Jon Snow would not. But that (alone) does not prove that Jon isn't part-Targaryen. It just shows that if he is part-Targaryen, this is one of the powers he did not inherit.

On that point, are there any examples of Targaryens who were actually burned by fire? Aerion drank (ie, consumed a liquid and not a gas) wildfire, which is almost certainly toxic. Viserys had molten gold poured on him, which may have suffocated him. At least, it does not say he caught on fire. Rhaenyra was eaten by a dragon, with no mention of her being burned, which is interesting. I know Daenerys' baby dragons liked cooked meat but that does not mean that one would not eat an uncookable person if it was ordered to do so by its master.

[Creepio]

Except what theguyfromthevale has already said, there is this whole aspect of the KG vows - no matter what they may have thought about Rhaegar's intentions, there is no explanation why the paragons of knighthood were not doing what they were sworn to do (guard the king, which would be Viserys at that moment) while repeatedly emphasizing that they were KG and keeping their vows.

This still doesn't cover the dishonour to Lyanna, though. Why dishonour the woman he supposedly loved if he possessed the means to make it right since the very beginning?

Didn't Targs practice bigamy? Perhaps he planned on marrying her (or already did in secret or something).

[The guy from the Vale]

Didn't Targs practice bigamy? Perhaps he planned on marrying her (or already did in secret or something).

That's what Ygrain and me are getting at. Jon is most probably Rhaegar's legitimate child, born into his marriage with Lyanna.

[Ygrain]

Okay, now I see why you are confused. "Hot wind" is not the same as "furnace wind." Remember, Balerion did not melt the Iron Throne (or Harrenhal, for that matter) with hot breath. He did it with furnace breath.

Suffice it to say, while Daenerys withstood Drogon's "furnace wind," I am pretty sure Jon Snow would not. But that (alone) does not prove that Jon isn't part-Targaryen. It just shows that if he is part-Targaryen, this is one of the powers he did not inherit.

On that point, are there any examples of Targaryens who were actually burned by fire? Aerion drank (ie, consumed a liquid and not a gas) wildfire, which is almost certainly toxic. Viserys had molten gold poured on him, which may have suffocated him. At least, it does not say he caught on fire. Rhaenyra was eaten by a dragon, with no mention of her being burned, which is interesting. I know Daenerys' baby dragons liked cooked meat but that does not mean that one would not eat an uncookable person if it was ordered to do so by its master.

Dear Ruby. What is the basic characteristics of furnace? HOT. What do you think that the "hot wind" which Quentyn feels is? How did it come into existence, other than that Rhaegal breathed at him? Or do you intend to propose that dragons possess three-level breathing mode, "hot wind", "furnace wind", "fire"? "Furnace wind" is "HOT like furnace", meaning "very hot", not necessarily "of the temperature to melt metal".

And stop obsessing with Balerion's "furnace breath", as Balerion was much older, bigger and apparently hotter than Dany's dragons, as none of them ever showed ability to melt anything with its breath.

Didn't Targs practice bigamy? Perhaps he planned on marrying her (or already did in secret or something).

Polygamy :-)

[Alia of the knife]

Except that it says "wake dragons from stone", meaning more than one of them---three in Dany's case. Moreover that waking was done "under the bleeding star" as per the prophecy. Jon does exactly nothing that is either magical or in any way remarkable "under the bleeding star". He certainly wakes no dragons from stone or in any other way. How anybody who is paying attention to what that part of the prophecy actually says can imagine that Jon has fulfilled it is a mystery to me. I cannot now recall what Apple Martini said in response to that point when I raised it months ago, but she is the only person who has even attempted to address it. Changing "wake dragons from stone" to "wake a dragon" and then ignoring the "bleeding star" part is just plain cheating about what it would mean to fulfill the prophecy, which is what you are doing Alia of the Knife. :(

Only Tom Brady cheats, I however, do not. :o

Just kidding, :P ( well actually I don't cheat, because I like to be able to sleep at night).

What I mean is that "waking the dragon" is used both metaphorically, or possibly literally, which would be true in the case of prophesy, and "stone dragons" are truly awakened.

In the metaphorical sense, it's been used to as an example of temper, or an understanding of some truth, which would be the case for both Rhaegar and Jon at pivotal moments in their life as in Rhaegars meeting Lyanna, and Jons moment of betrayal.

[Maxpey]

Only Tom Brady cheats, I however, do not. :o

Just kidding, :P ( well actually I don't cheat, because I like to be able to sleep at night).

What I mean is that "waking the dragon" is used both metaphorically, or possibly literally, which would be true in the case of prophesy, and "stone dragons" are truly awakened.

In the metaphorical sense, it's been used to as an example of temper, or an understanding of some truth, which would be the case for both Rhaegar and Jon at pivotal moments in their life as in Rhaegars meeting Lyanna, and Jons moment of betrayal.

Tom Brady and the rest of the Pats are cheaters, especially their coach (JK!).

I hate the Pats, but one good thing I can say about the organization is that they have a low tolerance for criminal behavior (at least when it comes to murdering three people).

Seriously, though, I agree with you that "waking the dragon" clearly has a duel meaning in the text.

[Stannis Lives]

It will be GRRM's creativity to establish who's 'cheating' at what. From what I understand of his narrative and the intrinsic nature of prophecy, I'd strongly recommend to suspend rash judgement. Prophecies have a non-linear way to come true and they walk a twisted path on irony shaped legs.

At this point NONE of us know who Azor Ahai reborn is. Strong clues point to Daenerys, I agree. But as per the above mentioned 'ironic, twisted, non-linear' quality of prophecy, I can't exclude a more metaphorical and symbolic interpretation of the passage. It's coherent with Martin's narrative and its classical mold.

There is a clear chronological order to pay attention to. The bleeding red star could refer to Ser Patrek's bloody death and heraldry (five-pointed stars). The smoke, a hint to Jon's smoking wounds. The salt, to Bowen Marsh's tears. 'Waking dragons out of stone' is last in sequence and could refer to events yet to happen. I.e. to anything. I wouldn't emphasize the plural detail though. Waking 'dragons' from stone could well be a simple generalization. Dragons (udisclosed Targaryens?) will be waken (unveiled?) out of stone (the crypts of Winterfell finally releasing their buried secrets?) the same way kings are a rare sight in the North [...] More likely [...] hiding under the snow. Snow, Ned! *wink, wink, nudge, nudge* One king hides in the North under the pseudonym Snow, not a multitude of them.

ETA Not to mention the prophecy could well refer to 'more' than one savior figure. Solving and integrating the debate.

Shireen has the stone man disease and is also the blood of a king. Mel will sacrifice shireen to save Jon, fulfilling the prophecy and Jon will be reborn as tptwp.

[Kosh Naranek]

I am not convinced the prophecy is tied to one person. I think that multiple individuals will make up pieces of the puzzle. I think both Jon and Dany have a role to play as does Aegon. As Bloodraven is a keen Targ supporter, and has the raven refer to Jon as "king," I do believe Jon to be the rightful heir. However, I do not believe he just be automatically thrown on a throne. Rather I think that power will accrue to him via his position at the Wall and the situation in the North. Even if he is not Robb's successor, I could see him functioning as Lord Protector for Rickon.

[Stannis Lives]

When the red star bleeds - Ser Patrek's bloody body with stars in the sky

and darkness gathers, - winter is coming per the white raven

Azor Ahai shall be born amidst smoke and salt - Bowen's tears and Jon's wound

to wake dragons out of stone. -Shireen has the stone man's disease and has king's blood. Jon will be on the verge of death and Mel will sacrifice Shireen to save Jon, fulfilling the prophecy and Jon will be reborn as AA.