Jump to content

R+L=J v. 57


Stubby

Recommended Posts

It's blindly if you exclude the possiblity, that there might be another explanation. I believe that R+ L = J...but feel I must remain open to the idea that GRRM is playing us.

It's certainly possible, but it would have to be a pretty incredible alternate explanation for it to A ) fill all of the plot holes that R+L=J fills, B ) answers the ?+?=J question, and C ) is already foreshadowed/not an ass-pull.

I can't imagine how he could do it at this point, but that's probably why I'm not a best selling author.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As long as another explanation covers the whole ground that R+L do, I am open to it. So far, I have seen none, therefore I reject all the N+XY variants.

This.

As far as I'm concerned, there's a very simple 2-part test for any ?+?=J theory:

1) Does it fit the timeline

2) Does it explain the secrecy surrounding Jon's parentage

That's it, and yet every single theory that I've seen except R+L=J fails that test.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This.

As far as I'm concerned, there's a very simple 2-part test for any ?+?=J theory:

1) Does it fit the timeline

2) Does it explain the secrecy surrounding Jon's parentage

That's it, and yet every single theory that I've seen except R+L=J fails that test.

Pretty much. It's not enough to say, "Well Ned and Ashara could be Jon's parents." It also has to explain why it's such a big damn secret, as well as explain what happened to Lyanna and why, what Ned promised her, why he remembers her death the way he does, etc. There's much more at stake here than "just" who Jon's parents are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've come across something in Catelyn's chapter:

Nine moons had waxed and waned, and Robb had been born in Riverrun while his father still warred in the south. She had brought him forth in blood and pain, not knowing whether Ned would ever see him. (Catelyn AGOT)

- Watch the progression:

Women birth children in blood and pain, and die. (Damphair in Theon chapter, ACOK)

That was the way of this cold world, where men fished the sea and dug in the ground and died, whilst women brought forth short-lived children from beds of blood and pain. (Damphair, AFFC)

I can totally see GRRM chuckling at hiding a reference to Jon's mother in Catelyn's chapter :-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've come across something in Catelyn's chapter:

Nine moons had waxed and waned, and Robb had been born in Riverrun while his father still warred in the south. She had brought him forth in blood and pain, not knowing whether Ned would ever see him. (Catelyn AGOT)

- Watch the progression:

Women birth children in blood and pain, and die. (Damphair in Theon chapter, ACOK)

That was the way of this cold world, where men fished the sea and dug in the ground and died, whilst women brought forth short-lived children from beds of blood and pain. (Damphair, AFFC)

I can totally see GRRM chuckling at hiding a reference to Jon's mother in Catelyn's chapter :-)

I can't believe how many things i missed reading these books. Those quotes don't seems like a simple coincidence to me, GRRM is putting those little clues everywhere and readers have to pick it up to know the answer of this mystery.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've come across something in Catelyn's chapter:

Nine moons had waxed and waned, and Robb had been born in Riverrun while his father still warred in the south. She had brought him forth in blood and pain, not knowing whether Ned would ever see him. (Catelyn AGOT)

- Watch the progression:

Women birth children in blood and pain, and die. (Damphair in Theon chapter, ACOK)

That was the way of this cold world, where men fished the sea and dug in the ground and died, whilst women brought forth short-lived children from beds of blood and pain. (Damphair, AFFC)

I can totally see GRRM chuckling at hiding a reference to Jon's mother in Catelyn's chapter :-)

Yeah, I've also noticed some references to Jon's mother in Cat's chapters.

Thinking about it now, you wouldn't really expect any clues in her chapters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This may have been said before, but rather than disrupt the discussion going on in the Princess and Queen thread, I'll post it here. I just finished reading the excerpt and the editorial by Bridget McGovern, and in McGovern's rundown she mentions some things that really got me thinking about R+L=J and that seem consistent with the already existing foreshadowing for the theory.

She says of the Princess and the Queen: "In spite of the historical remove, fans of the series will recognize plenty of familiar names, themes, and situational parallels with the books. The Lannisters are rich and powerful, the Starks are grim and honorable, the Baratheons are proud and make trouble, the Greyjoys are belligerent and fickle, and some of the alliances made (or undone) during the Dance reflect the lines drawn during Robert’s Rebellion and the War of the Five Kings. . ."

So, no surpises there, but she specifically mentions Robert's Rebellion and the 'contemporary' war, two events which play a very large role in Jon's life and development. She also points out the setup--"all these little bits of Westerosi history repeating" that GRRM has established in the series and that permeate each character's POV. She's reminded me that when thinking of this theory, it's important to pay attention to the foreshadowing, since, as the story shows (and I suspect the R+L=J theory will prove), the past is not done with us.

McGovern goes on to say: "But while the Dance of the Dragons unfolds on the battlefield, it is strongly suggested that the true origins of the war began at a ball held long before the king’s death."

Well, if that doesn't take all. Now for a moment let's go forward in time, beyond Robert's Rebellion. . . it makes me think that (at least according to the way things are presented so far) the coming war, one which will feature a struggle for the throne AND a more urgent struggle to survive against what lurks in the north, has its beginnings at a party as well. now on it's own, it doesn't provide solid evidence for or against Ashara. But it certainly allows us to consider the overarching patterns, themes and events which have acted on all of the characters present at the Tourney and on those who have come after (and who may, without knowing it, be finding their own place in the pattern).

I've heard it said that Jon's mother's identity is one of the big mysteries of the series. Why keep Jon's mother under wraps unless it is important, the kind of secret that could bring down a kingdom, set off a war? (gee, do I mean like what happened when word was leaked that the dead King's heirs aren't really his children, but his Queen's bastards born of incest with her twin brother? You bet I do!) What kind of position would the victorious Robert have been in if it had been revealed that his fiancee had died giving birth to a Targaryen prince? Frankly, I don't see how Ashara being Jon's mother would cause this kind of disruption, then or years down the road when we join the story. But Ned --for many reasons, including perhaps wishing to be done with a war that had cost him his father, brother and only sister, not to mention several of his good friends/bannermen and other knights he admired (like Dayne) -- might be willing to keep the answer to this particular, realm-shattering little family mystery a secret. The lies we tell for love.

Even Hamlet knew the best way to solve a mystery was to re-enact the events in question. . . here I think, we have only to examine the events in the past. I suspect that it is willingly giving up its secrets. and I really have to wonder if Ned, who loved the north and loved his family, was doing his best all along to prevent further war when he could and above all to keep Jon away from it. Ned was ultimately protecting the person who, whether Ned knew it or not, might become key to winning a more important battle than the one for the throne, and positioning Jon in the best place for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thing is, we have too much evidence pointing in direction that Jon is Rhaegar/Lyanna's child, plus timeline doesn't fit for Ned/Ashara.

Are you sure the timeline does not fit for Eddard/Ashara? I think the commonly followed timeline here (not that I agree with all of it) is this.

1. Battle of the Bells.

2. Eddard marries Catelyn.

3. Eddard and Catelyn have a two week honeymoon at Riverrun.

4. Eddard leaves Catelyn and then fights for 9 more months "in the South."

5. Jon is born more than 9 months after the Eddard/Catelyn wedding.

Looking at this timeline, why couldn't Eddard and Ashara meet up and conceive Jon after Eddard's honeymoon while he is warring in the south?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you sure the timeline does not fit for Eddard/Ashara? I think the commonly followed timeline here (not that I agree with all of it) is this.

1. Battle of the Bells.

2. Eddard marries Catelyn.

3. Eddard and Catelyn have a two week honeymoon at Riverrun.

4. Eddard leaves Catelyn and then fights for 9 more months "in the South."

5. Jon is born more than 9 months after the Eddard/Catelyn wedding.

Looking at this timeline, why couldn't Eddard and Ashara meet up and conceive Jon after Eddard's honeymoon while he is warring in the south?

Until and unless you can bring a single textual hint that Ned and Ashara met between the tourney and his visit to Starfall, any further talk of timelines is a waste of time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Until and unless you can bring a single textual hint that Ned and Ashara met between the tourney and his visit to Starfall, any further talk of timelines is a waste of time.

Well, it isn't a waste of time. Whenever someone suggests on this thread that Ashara may be the mother, at least one poster dismisses that by saying the timeline does not work. But the timeline does work.

And there are hints of such a meeting. There is a baby (supposedly) conceived during that period, Eddard Stark calling that baby "son" for all the world to see, and a rumor heard by Cersei and Carelyn that the mother was Ashara. There is Mr Martin saying right out that Ashara was not nailed to the floor at Starfall during the critical time. There are plenty of hints that Ned and Ashara met at the right time. You might not be convinced by it but that is different from saying there are no hints that it might be true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, it isn't a waste of time. Whenever someone suggests on this thread that Ashara may be the mother, at least one poster dismisses that by saying the timeline does not work. But the timeline does work.

And there are hints of such a meeting. There is a baby (supposedly) conceived during that period, Eddard Stark calling that baby "son" for all the world to see, and a rumor heard by Cersei and Carelyn that the mother was Ashara. There is Mr Martin saying right out that Ashara was not nailed to the floor at Starfall during the critical time. There are plenty of hints that Ned and Ashara met at the right time. You might not be convinced by it but that is different from saying there are no hints that it might be true.

That's pure delusion. You're putting together disconnected events and rumours, those are NOT hints at meeting of the two. There is a baby, there is a rumour, and there is a hint at Ashara potentially having an agenda of her own or playing a part in the story. There is NO hint at her being in the same location with Ned.

Here goes a version from Harwin who had the same access as Catelyn and better than Cersei:

“Aye, he told me. Lady Ashara Dayne. It’s an old tale, that one. I heard it once at Winterfell, when I was no older than you are now.” He took hold of her bridle firmly and turned her horse around. “I doubt there’s any truth to it. But if there is, what of it? When Ned met this Dornish lady, his brother Brandon was still alive, and it was him betrothed to Lady Catelyn, so there’s no stain on your father’s honor. There’s nought like a tourney to make the blood run hot, so maybe some words were whispered in a tent of a night, who can say? Words or kisses, maybe more, but where’s the harm in that? Spring had come, or so they thought, and neither one of them was pledged.”

Zero reference to any post-Harrenhall meeting, while he seriously doubts that Ned and Ashara ever had a thing in the first place. Combine it with the rumour that Catelyn hears, the one about Arthur's death and Ashara's suicide, and what you get is exactly what I said initially - ZERO account of any meeting between Harrenhall and Starfall.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, it isn't a waste of time. Whenever someone suggests on this thread that Ashara may be the mother, at least one poster dismisses that by saying the timeline does not work. But the timeline does work.

And there are hints of such a meeting. There is a baby (supposedly) conceived during that period, Eddard Stark calling that baby "son" for all the world to see, and a rumor heard by Cersei and Carelyn that the mother was Ashara. There is Mr Martin saying right out that Ashara was not nailed to the floor at Starfall during the critical time. There are plenty of hints that Ned and Ashara met at the right time. You might not be convinced by it but that is different from saying there are no hints that it might be true.

What evidence about timeline you speak about? We know Ashara got pregnant during Harrenhall tourney, we know she gave birth to stillborn baby girl. And after that, she went to Starfall. Nothing, absolutely nothing in the text suggests that Ashara and Ned met between Harrenhall tourney and his visit to Starfall post-ToJ events. So, unless you want to present us with a single clue from the books that speaks of this imaginary meeting, I would say that simply timeline doesn't fit. After all, unlike you, I have textual background for my claim.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

See, this is what happens when you make theories with no evidence, just because something is possible doesn't mean it's plausible. And what happened to reading the entire thread before posting questions?

As Mladen and Ygrain mentioned, there is absolutely no hint that Rhaegar met Lyanna after the tourney. Ned and Ashara on the other hand, plenty. Yes, there is no conclusive proof that A+N=J, but ti's at least supported by the evidence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

See, this is what happens when you make theories with no evidence, just because something is possible doesn't mean it's plausible. And what happened to reading the entire thread before posting questions?

As Mladen and Ygrain mentioned, there is absolutely no hint that Rhaegar met Lyanna after the tourney. Ned and Ashara on the other hand, plenty. Yes, there is no conclusive proof that A+N=J, but ti's at least supported by the evidence.

What?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A few days at the sea side and... v.57 :blink:

I've quickly perused the last thread and was delighted by the 'Rhaegar is a prick' post and the ones more or less openly labelling the lot of us as a bunch of delusional nerds. All in all, very insightful. Luckily GRRM doesn't read our wild ravings on this board or else he could get, you know, ideas :rolleyes:

<snip>

She says of the Princess and the Queen: "In spite of the historical remove, fans of the series will recognize plenty of familiar names, themes, and situational parallels with the books. The Lannisters are rich and powerful, the Starks are grim and honorable, the Baratheons are proud and make trouble, the Greyjoys are belligerent and fickle, and some of the alliances made (or undone) during the Dance reflect the lines drawn during Robert’s Rebellion and the War of the Five Kings. . ."

So, no surpises there, but she specifically mentions Robert's Rebellion and the 'contemporary' war, two events which play a very large role in Jon's life and development. She also points out the setup--"all these little bits of Westerosi history repeating" that GRRM has established in the series and that permeate each character's POV. She's reminded me that when thinking of this theory, it's important to pay attention to the foreshadowing, since, as the story shows (and I suspect the R+L=J theory will prove), the past is not done with us.

<snip>

Very interesting analysis.

The dragon is time. It has no beginning and no ending, so all things come round again.

I think this is the very cornerstone of the Corpus Martinianum: the cyclicity of time and the endless chain that binds the human condition to the past.

We are puppets dancing on the strings of those who came before us, and one day our own children will take up our strings and dance on in our steads.

It's sad and poetic at the same time. And painfully true.

I've come across something in Catelyn's chapter:

Nine moons had waxed and waned, and Robb had been born in Riverrun while his father still warred in the south. She had brought him forth in blood and pain, not knowing whether Ned would ever see him. (Catelyn AGOT)

- Watch the progression:

Women birth children in blood and pain, and die. (Damphair in Theon chapter, ACOK)

That was the way of this cold world, where men fished the sea and dug in the ground and died, whilst women brought forth short-lived children from beds of blood and pain. (Damphair, AFFC)

I can totally see GRRM chuckling at hiding a reference to Jon's mother in Catelyn's chapter :-)

Another good catch and... elective affinities ;) I was re-reading the following passage in AGoT, another Catelyn's chapter:

Eddard Stark had married her in Brandon’s place, as custom decreed, but the shadow of his dead brother still lay between them, as did the other, the shadow of the woman he would not name, the woman who had borne him his bastard son.

Emphasis mine. The shadow of his dead brother (Brandon) still lay between them, as did the other (sibling, Lyanna), the woman who had borne him his (to all intents and purposes) bastard son.

How to hide in plain sight a hidden truth (when you are a great writer).

As for the ol' good Ashara-could-be-Jon's-mom debate (I was suffering from withdrawal symptoms :lol: ), I lazily link AM's test questions and add my two cents: why denying Jon the truth? Why denying an emotionally damaged orphan his peace of mind? :dunno:

p.s. :grouphug: to sabrecmc and Rhaegar's Love

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's pure delusion. You're putting together disconnected events and rumours, those are NOT hints at meeting of the two. There is a baby, there is a rumour, and there is a hint at Ashara potentially having an agenda of her own or playing a part in the story. There is NO hint at her being in the same location with Ned.

Here goes a version from Harwin who had the same access as Catelyn and better than Cersei:

&ldquo;Aye, he told me. Lady Ashara Dayne. It&rsquo;s an old tale, that one. I heard it once at Winterfell, when I was no older than you are now.&rdquo; He took hold of her bridle firmly and turned her horse around. &ldquo;I doubt there&rsquo;s any truth to it. But if there is, what of it? When Ned met this Dornish lady, his brother Brandon was still alive, and it was him betrothed to Lady Catelyn, so there&rsquo;s no stain on your father&rsquo;s honor. There&rsquo;s nought like a tourney to make the blood run hot, so maybe some words were whispered in a tent of a night, who can say? Words or kisses, maybe more, but where&rsquo;s the harm in that? Spring had come, or so they thought, and neither one of them was pledged.&rdquo;

Zero reference to any post-Harrenhall meeting, while he seriously doubts that Ned and Ashara ever had a thing in the first place. Combine it with the rumour that Catelyn hears, the one about Arthur's death and Ashara's suicide, and what you get is exactly what I said initially - ZERO account of any meeting between Harrenhall and Starfall.

As a relatively new poster here, I'll say that this is the type of exchange that can be very frustrating. I proved conclusively that the timeline does not rule out Ashara as a mother for Jon. All this requires is the possibility that Eddard and Ashara were in the same location 9 months or less before the Sack of King's Landing. All we know about Eddard during that time is that he was fighting in the south; that he wasn't at Stony Sept (already did that); he wasn't in the West (never fought Tywin); wasn't sacking Highgarden (Mace would have lifted the siege of Storm's End to intervene); wasn't fighting in the Vale (Arryn already took care of that). That leaves plenty of places for Eddard to meet Ashara. Like Dorne, for instance. Or Harrenhal.

All we know about Ashara's location at the time is that she was not nailed to the floor at Starfall. Plenty of other places she might have been.

Rather than just acknowledge this and move on, you changed the subject to say there no hints of such a meeting. I don't know how you can say this when there is a baby, Eddard publicly acknowledged paternity, and people in different parts of the country think Ashara is the mother. What is that other than a hint that the supposed mother a d the supposed father crossed paths at the right time?

I think what you are really trying to say is that the timeline could work for Eddard and Ashara, there are hints in the text that this may be true, but you are not persuaded by those hints.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What evidence about timeline you speak about? We know Ashara got pregnant during Harrenhall tourney, we know she gave birth to stillborn baby girl. And after that, she went to Starfall. Nothing, absolutely nothing in the text suggests that Ashara and Ned met between Harrenhall tourney and his visit to Starfall post-ToJ events. So, unless you want to present us with a single clue from the books that speaks of this imaginary meeting, I would say that simply timeline doesn't fit. After all, unlike you, I have textual background for my claim.

What makes you think Barristan's information is more reliable than Catelyn's, Cersei's and Harwyn's?

And if Barristan is right, why do you think that if she had a stillbirth some months after the Harrenhal tournament, she did not get pregnant a second time, during Robert's rebellion? Plenty of time for both things to happen.

Any way you look at it, the "timeline" does not rule out Ashara.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What makes you think Barristan's information is more reliable than Catelyn's, Cersei's and Harwyn's?

And if Barristan is right, why do you think that if she had a stillbirth some months after the Harrenhal tournament, she did not get pregnant a second time, during Robert's rebellion? Plenty of time for both things to happen.

Any way you look at it, the "timeline" does not rule out Ashara.

Barristan is more reliable than Catelyn, Cersei or Harwyn because he did most probably see Ashara after the tourney, and definitely knew her better than any of these others. Remember, she was Elia's handmaiden, so she was in KL for a considerable time while of the other three, only Cersei ever lived in KL, and was removed from there after Harrenhal when Barristan wasn't. Unless Ashara directly left the court after Harrenhal (possible, but unsubstantiated), he met her a number of times after the tourney too.

Barristan's info about Ashara having a stillborn daughter is also quite specific - do we know he only had second-hand accounts of that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What makes you think Barristan's information is more reliable than Catelyn's, Cersei's and Harwyn's?

And if Barristan is right, why do you think that if she had a stillbirth some months after the Harrenhal tournament, she did not get pregnant a second time, during Robert's rebellion? Plenty of time for both things to happen.

Any way you look at it, the "timeline" does not rule out Ashara.

1. Barristan, unlike all three mentioned was in Harrenhall

2. Barristan knew Ashara, and spent significant ammount of time with her in KL

3. Because, between Tourney of Harrenhall and Jon's birth has less than two years apart, it would be difficult for a woman to get pregnant that quickly after giving birth to stillborn child(although not impossible). Also, nothing suggests that Ned and Ashara met any time during RR, which had to have happened so Ashara would be Jon's mother. So, we have relatively short period of time for 2 pregnancies, then we have no record of Ashara and Ned meeting between Harrenhall and Starfall... Unless, of course, you want to argue that Ned's sperm travelled on its own, found Ashara and impregnated her... In that case, it would make sense...

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...