Jon's claim to the throne

[Pikachu101]

Really? Not a single character would care or believe it? Even those who might see it in their interest to support his claim?

I would love to see anyone see the logic behind R+L=J. Enough to support his claim anyway, especially if Aegon is in the picture

Besides, the OP asked where Jon's claim could possibly come from, and we've been trying to answer that question. Whether or not enough people will believe it is ultimately beside the point.

Well the answer to that is simple: he only has a claim to KitN because of Robb's will and even then the minute Rickon pops up he's lost it.

[Light a wight tonight]

But Ned was persuaded of Myrcella, Tommen and Joffrey's bastardy just because they all had blond hair. We are aware of the concept of regressive genes but here in the real world, it'd be impossible for non-scientists to pre-determine whether every child with dark haired parents would also grow up to possess dark hair. Yet, this relatively simple concept was enough in Westeros to amount to conclusive proof that Robert was not their father.

I am not saying that hair colour will be involved, but using the above analogy, it could also be another equally simple concept which is sufficient to prove to Westeros that Jon is the rightful heir to the IT.

In Westerosi genetics Baratheons all had black hair. It's a specific case. That was what Jon Arryn found in that old book book, plus it was true for all of Robert's bastards. The hair being not-black indicates that the Cercei's children are not Robert's. The function of the kiddies' hair being blond was to point to a Lannister as the father.

Things work differently in fantasy worlds. They have stuff like dragons and unicorns. You can't apply real-world science.

[Dragonfish]

I would love to see anyone see the logic behind R+L=J. Enough to support his claim anyway, especially if Aegon is in the picture

What's so hard to see about the logic behind R+L=J? Rhaegar and Lyanna were alone together for quite awhile, and it's widely understood that they had "relations." It's only natural that a child would've come from that at some point. And the Targaryens used to practice polygamy, so it's not absurd that they might've married. That doesn't necessarily mean that everyone will believe it, but it also doesn't mean that no one will.

Well the answer to that is simple: he only has a claim to KitN because of Robb's will and even then the minute Rickon pops up he's lost it.

No, the OP was asking about his claim to the Iron Throne.

[Dragonfish]

I think the OP asked whether Jon is a bastard because Rhaegar was married to Elia, not Lyanna, which could mean that Jon has no claim to the IT. The answer (assuming R+L=J) has to be (1) yes, that is correct, because Rhaegar and Lyanna weren't married, (2) no that is wrong, because Rhaegar and Lyanna entered into a marriage that would be widely accepted if people knew about it, or (3) maybe, because Rhaegar and Lyanna undertook some sort of ceremony the validity of which would be open to debate.

I disagree. Whether or not people would accept his claim is a related but separate issue from the question of how exactly he could have a claim in the first place, which is what the OP was asking about. And in any case, even if I accept that all of the above are valid responses to their question, they're still softer responses compared to the poster I responded to, who basically said that Jon has no claim because no one would believe it, end of story. That's quite a bit different from "maybe, but its validity would be open to debate."

[Dragonfish]

I've read this argument any number of times and it always seems so absurd.

I mean, really. The Kingsguard are not robots who are programmed to believe that the King must definitely be safe as long as there is at least one KG with him.

They are pretty much robots when it comes to following orders. The point about Aerys having one Kingsguard isn't meant to demonstrate that he was safe, but that the Kingsguard's oath was being fulfilled and they could therefore be dispatched to other areas (which was another one of their responsibilities).

All this would have been obvious to Dayne, Hightower and Whent from the instant they were notified Rhaegar had left Aerys alone with Jaime, probably well before Rhaegar even died.

What makes you think they would've found out "well before" Rhaegar died? Like I said before, news does not travel instantaneously. The Trident and the Sack all happened within a relatively short timespan, and it's entirely likely that no news reached them until after all was said and done.

It's so crazy for this still to be argued about when GRRM has been asked this question point blank in an interview, and has said, outright, that if Rhaegar told the KG at the ToJ to do a certain thing, they would have to do it -- no ifs, ands, or buts.

Oh God, not this again. The reason people keep arguing despite George's words is that George does not actually speak to the issue at hand. And no point does he ever address whether or not there exists a contradiction between their oath to protect the king and their oath to follow orders. He was asked why the Kingsguard stayed, and he basically said, "They have to follow orders," which, while perfectly true in these circumstances, could not possibly be true in all circumstances (otherwise we'd have to accept that they'd have to kill the king if ordered to by Rhaegar, which is patently absurd).

[Rickeen Baratheon]

I have a feeling they were protecting something else... because, who would believe Ned Stark would kill his own sister and nephew, if that were the case? I think it is too simple to believe that Jesu- Jon was born there and will be king and will be accepted by everyone. My feelings are that he is probably Brandon's bastard, via Lady Dayne; which I believe could have happened while he was betrothed to Cat, so Ned would be protecting both his brother's memory and Cat's feelings that she was in fact, cheated on by someone she'd known more than one day. Also, Brandon Stark is kind of badass, I'm hoping Jon would be more like him. However, he could just be Ned's. They are -very- similar and Lyanna and Brandon were described as wild. ( See Rickon! )

[Twinslayer]

I disagree. Whether or not people would accept his claim is a related but separate issue from the question of how exactly he could have a claim in the first place, which is what the OP was asking about. And in any case, even if I accept that that all of the above are valid responses to their question, they're still softer responses compared to the poster I responded to, who basically said that Jon has no claim because no one would believe it, end of story. That's quite a bit different from "maybe, but its validity would be open to debate."

Fair enough. You and I read the OP a little differently. If the question is just whether there is any basis for Jon to make a claim then the answer is yes. I think that is right regardless of whether there was a marriage or not. If there's a marriage he can claim to be legit and people can agree or disagree. If there isn't a marriage, he still might make a claim on the basis that all of the legitimate male Targs are dead. That's one of the reasons I think Cersei wanted to kill all of Robert's bastards.

[Dragonfish]

I have a feeling they were protecting something else... because, who would believe Ned Stark would kill his own sister and nephew, if that were the case?

I don't think they'd fear that he'd kill his sister, but certainly they could fear that he'd allow the child to come to harm by taking him to Robert, as he would've been duty-bound to do. Even Lyanna seemed to think this possible, given that she practically had to beg Ned to agree to her promise before she ceased being afraid.

I think it is too simple to believe that Jesu- Jon was born there and will be king and will be accepted by everyone. My feelings are that he is probably Brandon's bastard, via Lady Dayne

Impossible, as Brandon died before Jon was conceived.

[the_one_who_was_promised]

In Westerosi genetics Baratheons all had black hair. It's a specific case. That was what Jon Arryn found in that old book book, plus it was true for all of Robert's bastards. The hair being not-black indicates that the Cercei's children are not Robert's. The function of the kiddies' hair being blond was to point to a Lannister as the father.

Things work differently in fantasy worlds. They have stuff like dragons and unicorns. You can't apply real-world science.

I pointed the fact that Westerosi genetics and real world genetics differ in my original post - but that was not the point in contention.

The point is that to us anyway, Westerosi genetics is a very simple concept but to them, it was sufficient to prove that Tommen, Myrcella and Joffrey were not Baratheons.

With respect to proving Jon's parentage, it might be that an equally relatively simple concept - such as a Targeryan heirloom or the Crown of the Winter Kings hidden beneath the crypts of Winterfell - might equally be sufficient to persuade Westerosis that Jon is who he says he is.

It wouldn't be enough in the real world, granted, but it might be all that is required in Westeros.

[the_one_who_was_promised]

What's interesting is that when Ned was in the cells, Varys offered to let him write a letter. Did Ned take him up on it? What did he say? Was Varys looking for confirmation about the ToJ, or at least clues in any message Ned may have sent to Jon?

To my knowledge, no letter was sent to Jon. Varys told Ned that all his correspondences would be intercepted by the Lannisters.

This could give another clue that Jon is the son of R+L, because it could indicate that Ned was prepared to take the secret to the grave rather than risk the wrong people finding out about it, but on the flip side, as no letter was written, we can never be sure of what would have been said etc.

[Burdette]

This may not be popular, but I don't believe anyone has a claim to the throne. If someone is powerful enough to conquer it, and hold it, they can claim it.

However, in regards to the question, there are two different ways of seeing it...

1.) The Targaryen family united the seven kingdoms, so as long as they stay united, the Targaryen's should have the claim. This would mean Jon WOULD have the best claim (assuming he is legitimate, and Aegon is an imposter).

2.) The Baratheon's took the 7 kingdoms from the Targs, and the other high lords fell in line, so now they are essentially the royal family, and the Targ claim is useless. This would give Stannis the best claim.

...I follow my original belief, that no one has a claim, but I can see other's opinions.

[IRON BANK]

the two main characters in this story will meet. Dany and Jon will eventually meet this will bring together the side characters and plot lines leading toward a culmination. This is how we will find out Jons decision when the plot lines start to come together somewhere toward the end of the story. I dont feel that his lineage will be down played into some side story never to be reavealed it is one of the main plot lines of the story. And I refuse to believe that he will be some second character all of this will come to a head. Also Jon's reveal could lead to what most people in westeros want which is a stark or targ back on the IT or whatever is left of westeros running things.

[Burdette]

the two main characters in this story will meet. Dany and Jon will eventually meet this will bring together the side characters and plot lines leading toward a culmination. This is how we will find out Jons decision when the plot lines start to come together somewhere toward the end of the story. I dont feel that his lineage will be down played into some side story never to be reavealed it is one of the main plot lines of the story. And I refuse to believe that he will be some second character all of this will come to a head. Also Jon's reveal could lead to what most people in westeros want which is a stark or targ back on the IT or whatever is left of westeros running things.

:agree:

I dont want the Targaryen's on the throne, unless it is Jon (partially bias). I hope it is Stannis though (unlikely).

[Arthur Dayne's Honor]

:agree:

I dont want the Targaryen's on the throne, unless it is Jon (partially bias). I hope it is Stannis though (unlikely).

Very unlikely. My dream would be to have Stannis as Warden of the East and Lord Paramount of the Stormlands with Jon as king but that will never happen. :bawl: :tantrum:

[Burdette]

Very unlikely. My dream would be to have Stannis as Warden of the East and Lord Paramount of the Stormlands with Jon as king but that will never happen. :bawl: :tantrum:

Understatement. :dunce:

[Ygrain]

Oh God, not this again. The reason people keep arguing despite George's words is that George does not actually speak to the issue at hand. And no point does he ever address whether or not there exists a contradiction between their oath to protect the king and their oath to follow orders. He was asked why the Kingsguard stayed, and he basically said, "They have to follow orders," which, while perfectly true in these circumstances, could not possibly be true in all circumstances (otherwise we'd have to accept that they'd have to kill the king if ordered to by Rhaegar, which is patently absurd).

Exactly. GRRM doesn't adress the problem at all because the question he was asked doesn't adress it, either.

Similarly, he never said that polygamy was impossible without dragons, either; he said that ti was easier to defy the Westerosi customs with the dragons than without them - yet, at the end of the day, the Targs were still able to continue the highly outrageous practice of incest even without their dragons. So again, not as conclusive as some people would have it.

As for fulfilling the duties: whatever order/vow/duty the KG might have been following, they were NOT fulfilling their duty to guard the king if Viserys was the first in the line of succession. If you were hired to do a job, and had other people (Darry etc) do it for you, would you claim that you are upholding your contract, while you are elsewhere working on another contract? Damn, whenever I stay home with ill kid and my colleagues take over my lessons, it has been made abundantly clear to me that I am not doing my most sacred duty to prepare the students for their finals and should get back ASAP. I find it highly unconvincing that the paragons of knighthood wouldn't be painfully aware that they were not doing what they were sworn to do, to guard the king, and yet emphasize that they are Kingsguard practically after every sentence.

[Burdette]

Exactly. GRRM doesn't adress the problem at all because the question he was asked doesn't adress it, either.

Similarly, he never said that polygamy was impossible without dragons, either; he said that ti was easier to defy the Westerosi customs with the dragons than without them - yet, at the end of the day, the Targs were still able to continue the highly outrageous practice of incest even without their dragons. So again, not as conclusive as some people would have it.

As for fulfilling the duties: whatever order/vow/duty the KG might have been following, they were NOT fulfilling their duty to guard the king if Viserys was the first in the line of succession. If you were hired to do a job, and had other people (Darry etc) do it for you, would you claim that you are upholding your contract, while you are elsewhere working on another contract? Damn, whenever I stay home with ill kid and my colleagues take over my lessons, it has been made abundantly clear to me that I am not doing my most sacred duty to prepare the students for their finals and should get back ASAP. I find it highly unconvincing that the paragons of knighthood wouldn't be painfully aware that they were not doing what they were sworn to do, to guard the king, and yet emphasize that they are Kingsguard practically after every sentence.

Kudos for being a teacher. I interned as an assistant teacher (for college) at an elementary school for over a year, and it is a lot more work than I thought.

[Pikachu101]

What's so hard to see about the logic behind R+L=J? Rhaegar and Lyanna were alone together for quite awhile, and it's widely understood that they had "relations." It's only natural that a child would've come from that at some point. And the Targaryens used to practice polygamy, so it's not absurd that they might've married. That doesn't necessarily mean that everyone will believe it, but it also doesn't mean that no one will.

So let me get this straight you think people would believe:

* A bastard

* who everyone recognised as Ned Stark's

* has no Targaryen features at all

* has no connections or proof

* unless you think a crag man's word is enough

* out of no where comes out claiming to be a Targaryen

* when it has never been mentioned before

* whilst there's a silver haired, purple eyed prince in the picture

Is the real deal? Gods be good, George should just give up trying to be realistic if its that simple

No, the OP was asking about his claim to the Iron Throne.

Well in that case the answer is: as if

[Dragonfish]

So let me get this straight you think people would believe:

* A bastard

* who everyone recognised as Ned Stark's

Only because Ned Stark told them he was his child. But if people were told that that was his lie to protect Jon, then I think it would "click" in some people's minds, the way it has for many readers.

Is the real deal? Gods be good, George should just give up trying to be realistic if its that simple

If people can believe that Robb Stark was capable of changing into a wolf, then yeah, I think some people would believe Jon's story.

Well in that case the answer is: as if

Have you been paying attention at all? Jon may very well have a claim, but whether or not people will accept it is a separate question.

[Pikachu101]

Only because Ned Stark told them he was his child. But if people were told that that was his lie to protect Jon, then I think it would "click" in some people's minds, the way it has for many readers.

If its that easy maybe Cersei should go around saying Aerys is her father. You know it might click in some people's minds :o

The readers don't believe R+L=J because of the little evidence that the character's are limited to. We know R+L=J is true because of Ned's PoV; something the characters don't have

If people can believe that Robb Stark was capable of changing into a wolf, then yeah, I think some people would believe Jon's story.

Totally different issues. Robb is a legendary king whilst Jon is a random bastard from the NWs who thinks he's Rhaegar Targaryen's son.

Have you been paying attention at all? Jon may very well have a claim, but whether or not people will accept it is a separate question.

Jon doesn't have a claim to the IT he's got his father and grandfather to thank for that <_<