Jump to content

R+L=J v. 57


Stubby

Recommended Posts

I don't know if somebody previously had already posted this theory:

I have thought about how Jon will find about his parentage. This number of people who might know about his story and are alive AND nearby is rather small. So I thought that we should stop looking for someone who has the knowledge, but instead for someone who will confront Jon with the events that took place.

You know who that might be? Ser Alliser Thorne.

I could very much imagine the following dialogue during a quiet moment (of course I would need to assume that Jon is alive in one form or another and that Alliser has survived his ranging and will meet him somewhere).

Jon would ask "Ser Alliser, why do you hate me so much? You have always hated me. You hated me when I was a recruit, and you hated me when I was choosen your Lord Commander. Why? Because I am a bastard?"

And Ser Alliser would go on about how everything went always downhill in his life when the Starks were invovled. How a war started when the Prince went off with Lyanna Stark. And how he had to go to the wall after the Starks and their allies won the war. And then, here at the wall he sees him. The bastard boy of the honourable Lord Stark. The whole war started for the honour of stupid Lyanna Stark when her family demanded her back, and then honourable Eddard Stark returns with a bastard. "That is why I hate you. Because you are the bastard of the honourable lord Stark"

And so the chapter could end with an inner monologue of Jon thinking He is right. My family was drawn into a war for the honour of Lyanna. But when my honourable father came home, he could not bring his sister. Instead he brought a boy, and he claimed that he was his son.

That way, we would not need anyone with secret knowledge like Howland Reed pop out of nowhere to officially introduce the topic within the books.

At least that might make him start thinking.

And it would be also a good reason why Thorne has been kept that long around in the story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Bran is going to see something through the weirwoods on the Isle of Faces that will help confirm R+L=J, and then it will be seconded by Howland Reed.

[...]

Just a hunch I've had, I'm sure others have had as well, but with Bran's newfound tree time traveling telepathy vision it makes a lot of sense for him to see something important happen on an island FULL OF WEIRWOODS that was in the middle of the lake that Rhaegar and Lyanna were staying at when they met.

I still say it will turn out that Random Septon Meribald, who has been going around marrying folks for 40 years, married R&L.

I strongly suspect that too, especially because there is no such thing as 'random' in Martin narrative. As well-demonstrated by 226 direct mentions of a certain character dead for 15 years at the beginning of the saga ;) If a character is introduced in such a grand style and/or insisted upon, chance is Martin is not yet done with him/her LOL

Septon Meribald makes more sense IMO than Bran. Howland spills the beans; Septon Meribald seconds the claim as a religious authority figure. Who would Bran tell? Jojen, Meera or Hodor? Yes, I know he's contacted Jon in his dream before that, but I don't think Bran's gift will ever be 'straightforward' so to speak. If Bran learns to see everything that would be much too easy...and boring besides...And even if Bran told Jon is his dreams, who would believe Jon? If people don't want to believe Howland Reed, they certainly won't believe that Ned's bastard had a 'dream' in which Ned's dead son told him about being Rhaegar's son...Or, they’ll believe Jon had a ‘dream’, they just won’t believe Jon is Rhaegar’s son.

If R+L=J is to have any importance in Jon's story-arc, the claim needs to be supported by a figure of authority - if Howland Reed isn't enough, that is.

Bran's story has another purpose. We already have Howland Reed for the big R+L=J reveal.

There’s also the possibility that dragons are able to ‘sniff out’ the blood of dragonlords. Tyrion mentions that in his conversation with Brown Ben Plumm, who was well liked by Dany’s dragon’s and is a second son of Viserys Plumm – someone with two drops of Targaryen blood.

Further, Barristan Selmy seems like someone who will live some years yet. He’s old, aye, but for some reason I think he’s the type of person who’ll live long enough to see generations and generations of young people pass away. So if he survives Meereen, which I think he will, there’s a chance he’ll meet Jon Snow. How many Targaryen’s has Barristan met?

I don’t buy for one second that Jon looks only a Stark. IMO, he has the Stark coloring and long face, enough to recognize him as kin to Ned Stark on first glimpse...but someone who is familiar with Targaryens of all sizes and colors might think differently.

Might Dany find Jon’s scowl familiar?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Further, Barristan Selmy seems like someone who will live some years yet. He’s old, aye, but for some reason I think he’s the type of person who’ll live long enough to see generations and generations of young people pass away. So if he survives Meereen, which I think he will, there’s a chance he’ll meet Jon Snow. How many Targaryen’s has Barristan met?

I don’t buy for one second that Jon looks only a Stark. IMO, he has the Stark coloring and long face, enough to recognize him as kin to Ned Stark on first glimpse...but someone who is familiar with Targaryens of all sizes and colors might think differently.

Might Dany find Jon’s scowl familiar?

Or, following the 'story within a story' pattern, Jon's eyeshape.

Areo Hotah about father-children resemblance:

Her hair was gold as well, and her eyes were deep blue pools... and yet somehow they reminded the captain of her father's eyes, though Oberyn's had been as black as night. All of Prince Oberyn's daughters have his viper eyes, Hotah realized suddenly. The color does not matter.

The color does not matter indeed.

<snip>

And it would be also a good reason why Thorne has been kept that long around in the story.

That he was kept around so long in relation to Jon's undisclosed parentage it's quite possible. If only for bitter ironic counterpoint to the revelation. Imagine poor Targaryen loyalist Thorne discovering he has been seething all this time over a dragon in hiding LOL

Thanks for giving me an opportunity to go off-topic: there is truly nothing random, and things are cyclical. I'm... mindblown. I don't think I've seen this mentioned anywhere, so I thought I would share here:

It has been argued that at the Purple Wedding, there had to be a signal for Marge to know not to drink from the chalice any more but no-one ever mentioned what the signal might be. I think it was... Rains of Castamere. Just before Tyrion pours new wine for Joffrey, Olenna makes a sarcastic remark that she hasn't heard the song in a while. What better signal to start the killing at a wedding might there be?

In retrospect, it seems so obvious... I wonder how many other such hints we are still missing.

Cyclical and cruelly ironic. Sounds like Martin LOL You could be onto something :bowdown:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don’t buy for one second that Jon looks only a Stark. IMO, he has the Stark coloring and long face, enough to recognize him as kin to Ned Stark on first glimpse...but someone who is familiar with Targaryens of all sizes and colors might think differently.

Might Dany find Jon’s scowl familiar?

I don't know but I think that she or Barristan may find some familiarity in his personality. I caused a bit of a controversy during the last thread by suggesting that Jon might have got the Stark look from Lyanna despite the marked similarity to Ned, and that Jon had inherited the honourable personality trait from Rhaegar, despite the marked similarity to Ned.

The point I was trying to make was that Ned could act as some sort of cover to disguise the various traits that Jon had inherited from both biological parents.

Barristan knew Rhaegar well; he would also have known that apart from Ned, the majority of the Starks that he was associated with back in his earlier days were rather hot tempered and willful. I think Barristan could be reminded of Rhaegar in Jon, and perhaps Daenerys may find some similarities to herself in another person who seems to have inherited the best Targ genes (meaning those not predisposed to sudden outbursts of madness).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Septon Meribald makes more sense IMO than Bran. Howland spills the beans; Septon Meribald seconds the claim as a religious authority figure. Who would Bran tell? Jojen, Meera or Hodor? Yes, I know he's contacted Jon in his dream before that, but I don't think Bran's gift will ever be 'straightforward' so to speak. If Bran learns to see everything that would be much too easy...and boring besides...And even if Bran told Jon is his dreams, who would believe Jon? If people don't want to believe Howland Reed, they certainly won't believe that Ned's bastard had a 'dream' in which Ned's dead son told him about being Rhaegar's son...Or, they’ll believe Jon had a ‘dream’, they just won’t believe Jon is Rhaegar’s son.

If R+L=J is to have any importance in Jon's story-arc, the claim needs to be supported by a figure of authority - if Howland Reed isn't enough, that is.

Bran's story has another purpose. We already have Howland Reed for the big R+L=J reveal.

I don't think Bran will reveal that R+L=J, or even taht if he did his opinion would matter.

What I'm saying is Bran could see the possible wedding on the Isle of Faces with the possible witnesses of Howland Reed, Septon Meribald, maybe a Knight of the Kingsguard that is now dead, whoever.

Bran doens't need to reveal that they had a baby, and that the baby was in fact Jon. But he could defnitly use his new powers to see something that will let the reader know that it is much more possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That he was kept around so long in relation to Jon's undisclosed parentage it's quite possible. If only for bitter ironic counterpoint to the revelation. Imagine poor Targaryen loyalist Thorne discovering he has been seething all this time over a dragon in hiding LOL

Ha! That would be quite interesting. I'm a brutal person, I suppose, but I still want JonCon to somehow discover (f)Aegon and the truth about R+L=J, though I don't actually think it will happen. I mean, the angst! Yeah, I'm mean.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd say GRRM already threw a Valyrian hint into Jon's physical description from the moment we first viewed him through Bran in AGOT.

If anyone has a copy of ASOS on hand, hopefully they can verify the exact page number and wording for this. In Tyrion IV, when Tywin shows Tyrion the two swords he had made after melting down Ice, Tyrion takes note of the color combo. We know that Valyrian steel is darker than traditional steel, but Tyrion specifically notes that "most Valyrian steel was a grey so dark it looked almost black".

Sounds familiar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for giving me an opportunity to go off-topic: there is truly nothing random, and things are cyclical. I'm... mindblown. I don't think I've seen this mentioned anywhere, so I thought I would share here:

It has been argued that at the Purple Wedding, there had to be a signal for Marge to know not to drink from the chalice any more but no-one ever mentioned what the signal might be. I think it was... Rains of Castamere. Just before Tyrion pours new wine for Joffrey, Olenna makes a sarcastic remark that she hasn't heard the song in a while. What better signal to start the killing at a wedding might there be?

In retrospect, it seems so obvious... I wonder how many other such hints we are still missing.

That is especially likely considering what song they played at the Red Wedding in the screenplay. ;)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know but I think that she or Barristan may find some familiarity in his personality. I caused a bit of a controversy during the last thread by suggesting that Jon might have got the Stark look from Lyanna despite the marked similarity to Ned, and that Jon had inherited the honourable personality trait from Rhaegar, despite the marked similarity to Ned.

The point I was trying to make was that Ned could act as some sort of cover to disguise the various traits that Jon had inherited from both biological parents.

Barristan knew Rhaegar well; he would also have known that apart from Ned, the majority of the Starks that he was associated with back in his earlier days were rather hot tempered and willful. I think Barristan could be reminded of Rhaegar in Jon, and perhaps Daenerys may find some similarities to herself in another person who seems to have inherited the best Targ genes (meaning those not predisposed to sudden outbursts of madness).

That's a nature vs nurture discussion....I don't believe in predetermined character traits > 'nature'.

Madness the kind that Targaryen's have, is I think, due to a genetic predisposition and that implies a hormonal/chemical imbalance, so it's a biological problem and has little to do with the social environment. But the 'character proper' of one person who does not suffer from chemical imbalances, is build through that person's socialization.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd say GRRM already threw a Valyrian hint into Jon's physical description from the moment we first viewed him through Bran in AGOT.

If anyone has a copy of ASOS on hand, hopefully they can verify the exact page number and wording for this. In Tyrion IV, when Tywin shows Tyrion the two swords he had made after melting down Ice, Tyrion takes note of the color combo. We know that Valyrian steel is darker than traditional steel, but Tyrion specifically notes that "most Valyrian steel was a grey so dark it looked almost black".

Sounds familiar.

Nice!

AGoT, Bran I:

“No,” Jon Snow said quietly. “It was not courage. This one was dead of fear. You could see it in his eyes, Stark.” Jon’s eyes were a grey so dark they seemed almost black, but there was little they did not see. He was of an age with Robb, but they did not look alike. Jon was slender where Robb was muscular, dark where Robb was fair, graceful and quick where his half brother was strong and fast.

ASoS, Tyrion IV:

Thrice at least Lord Tywin had offered to buy Valyrian longswords from impoverished lesser houses, but his advances had always been firmly rebuffed. The little lordlings would gladly part with their daughters should a Lannister come asking, but they cherished their old family swords. Tyrion wondered where the metal for this one had come from. A few master armorers could rework old Valyrian steel, but the secrets of its making had been lost when the Doom came to old Valyria. “The colors are strange,” he commented as he turned the blade in the sunlight. Most Valyrian steel was a grey so dark it looked almost black, as was true here as well. But blended into the folds was a red as deep as the grey. The two colors lapped over one another without ever touching, each ripple distinct, like waves of night and blood upon some steely shore. “How did you get this patterning? I’ve never seen anything like it.”

I wonder if this doesn't maybe tie into Donal Noye's comments about Robert Baratheon being the true steel; i.e., Jon is true Valyrian steel.

ACoK, Jon I:

The armorer considered that a moment. “Robert was the true steel. Stannis is pure iron, black and hard and strong, yes, but brittle, the way iron gets. He’ll break before he bends. And Renly,

that one, he’s copper, bright and shiny, pretty to look at but not worth all that much at the end of the day.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does anyone have a theory about what happened to Wylla's baby?

Per Lord Edric Dayne, Wylla is a real person, she's alive and she works at Starfall as a servant to House Dayne. She has been there at least as long as Edric has been alive. Edric knows her personally. He has interacted with her over a period of several years. Edric also believes that she gave birth to a baby right at the end of Robert's Rebellion (a few years before Edric was born) and that Wylla nursed that baby and then nursed Edric. This much is all probably true because if it wasn't, there are other people at Starfall who could tell Edric that it wasn't true.

Edric also believes that Eddard Stark took that other baby away at the end of Robert's Rebellion, named him Jon Snow and raised him at Winterfell. If this last part is not true, then what happened to Wylla's baby?

It can't be living at Starfall without people realizing it's Wylla's baby.

It could be that Wylla came to Starfall from somewhere else, after her baby was weaned and before Edric was born. That means she left the baby with someone else when she took service with the Daynes.

It could be the stillborn daughter Ser Barristan attributes to Lady Ashara, if there was a baby swap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does anyone have a theory about what happened to Wylla's baby?

Per Lord Edric Dayne, Wylla is a real person, she's alive and she works at Starfall as a servant to House Dayne. She has been there at least as long as Edric has been alive. Edric knows her personally. He has interacted with her over a period of several years. Edric also believes that she gave birth to a baby right at the end of Robert's Rebellion (a few years before Edric was born) and that Wylla nursed that baby and then nursed Edric. This much is all probably true because if it wasn't, there are other people at Starfall who could tell Edric that it wasn't true.

Edric also believes that Eddard Stark took that other baby away at the end of Robert's Rebellion, named him Jon Snow and raised him at Winterfell. If this last part is not true, then what happened to Wylla's baby?

It can't be living at Starfall without people realizing it's Wylla's baby.

It could be that Wylla came to Starfall from somewhere else, after her baby was weaned and before Edric was born. That means she left the baby with someone else when she took service with the Daynes.

It could be the stillborn daughter Ser Barristan attributes to Lady Ashara, if there was a baby swap.

I think she really is just a wet-nurse, and was caring for Jon before Ned came into the picture.

If you breast-feed without interruption, lactation continues. It's not uncommon for children to be breast-fed until they are two or older especially in places where proper nutrition/hygiene might be problematic. If a wet-nurse means to make any money out of nursing, then she must know how to keep lactation going. Lysa Arryn was still nursing Robert...when he was five? so we can't say how old Wylla's babe/child was, but we can say that her babe/child was at the very least, one year older than Jon. I'm saying at the very least because 1) if Wylla is well known, and for the story to be believable that she is Jon's mother, it must appear that she could have had enough time to conceive a child and 2) a wet-nurse would probably want to wean her own child before giving any of her precious milk away.

The story Edric tells Arya, is the same that Ned tells Robert. Wylla, is officially Jon’s mother...I don’t think she had any child that was born at the same time as Jon, but rather, that Wylla was present for Jon’s birth or brought to the ToJ only a few days later...I think it’s quite possible that she was not a servant at Starfall, but came from a surrounding village and only started working at Starfall after RR, or possibly even, after Edric’s birth.

I don't think it makes much sense for Ned to bring Jon to Starfall and ask for a wet-nurse there. So IMO, Jon and Wylla either came 'together' or Ned found Wylla in a village not far off, and left Jon in her care so he could drop off the sword at Starfall. How many wet-nurses can there be around there? Not so many I think. It’s possible then, that Wylla was only came to work at Starfall when it was clear that Edric’s mother could not feed him and that it is only circumstances that made her both Jon and Edric’s wet-nurse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Madness the kind that Targaryen's have, is I think, due to a genetic predisposition and that implies a hormonal/chemical imbalance, so it's a biological problem and has little to do with the social environment. But the 'character proper' of one person who does not suffer from chemical imbalances, is build through that person's socialization.

Agreed, I won't go into too much of this on this thread either. I am not an expert in psychology nor in sociology for that matter, but my understanding was that personality is inherited to some degree from biological parents (this has been observed in the study of several sets of identical twins who had been raised apart, yet shared significant similarities with regards to their character traits), however social environment does also play a significant role in how that person will develop given the baseline personality traits.

There was a case a few years ago in the UK regarding two child killers, and this argument was brought up in court because the kids' defence tried to argue that they were not culpable because they alleged that they suffered from such extreme inherited psychopathic tendencies, as to render them incapable of having exercised free will in committing the crime. I recall Social Scientists and Psychologists at the time arguing that while baseline personality traits were in principle inherited from biological parents, the social environment had helped determine the extent of their psychopathic behaviour, so as to basically conclude that their behaviour was not solely down to their genetic predispositions or social environments, but was due to a mixture of both.

ETA: Sorry to everyone if it seems I'm derailing this thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since this is my first post here i´m gonna say hello to everyone. :cheers:

I don´t wanna dig trough 8379476986 posts of this R + L = J theory to try and find has anyone asked the question who named the boy "Jon"?

Was it Eddard or Lyanna, and why that perticular name...

It is obvious the boy cannot have a "dragon" name for his own safety but was the choice to name him "Jon" Eddards way of "honnoring" his foster parent Jon Arryn or simply a random simple name that seemd to ryme good with "Snow".

If the first assumption is true, what the hell would Jon Arryn think about Eddard naming his BASTARD son after him? It´s bassicly an insult, just remember what Cersei tought about giwing Tywinn´s name to Lolly´s bastard... It makes no sense.

If the latter is true than the writer RR Martin himself, maybe left clues as to Jon Snow´s potentional destiny when he made a notion of a king Stark with that name:

http://awoiaf.wester...x.php/Jon_Stark

King Jon Stark was King in the North and head of House Stark before the War of Conquest. His son, Rickard, followed him on the throne an annexed the Neck to the Kingdom of the North.

History

When sea raiders landed in the east, he drove them out and built the castle Wolf's Den at the mouth of the White Knife, so as to be able to defend the mouth of the river.[1]

This could mean Jon Snow is meant to defeat the WW when they inavde the north and bulid a new castle and maybe start a branch of his own. Note that RR Martin made this statement:

There is no description of a personal coat of arms in the books, but George R.R. Martin told the company Valyrian Steel, who made replicas of Jon's sword, to use the reversed Stark colors on the plaque that goes with the sword.

Since no mention of the personal coat of army has been made in the books so far it means it´s about to happen in the next 2 books and it means:

- Jon survives the stabbing to live in the human(since wolves need no banners) form

- Jon leaves the Nights Watch(they don´t allow personal banners)

- Jon by taking the wolf as his sigil doesn´t "persue" to inform other people to his Targ heritage or his claim to the throne...

Simply if R+L=J is true by judging RR Martins pacing and rythm of telling the story so far the relevation of this should have already happend to give way it having a big impact on the overall "political" developments in westeros. Not to mention that only Howland Reed can confirm this and he´s not exactly "Tywinn Lannister" meaning he´s not high up the realm hierarchy to have his word count for anything.

p.s.

Why the hell was Eddard Stark fosterd in the Eyrie and who was Eddard Stark´s mother?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed, I won't go into too much of this on this thread either. I am not an expert in psychology nor in sociology for that matter, but my understanding was that personality is inherited to some degree from biological parents, however social environment does also play a significant role in how that person will develop given the baseline personality traits.

There was a case a few years ago in the UK regarding two child killers, and this argument was brought up in court because the kids' defence tried to argue that they were not culpable because they alleged that they suffered from such extreme inherited psychopathic tendencies, as to render them incapable of having exercised free will in committing the crime. I recall Social Scientists and Psychologists at the time arguing that while baseline personality traits were in principle inherited from biological parents, the social environment had helped determine the extent of their psychopathic behaviour, so as to basically conclude that their behaviour was not solely down to their genetic predispositions or social environments, but was due to a mixture of both.

ETA: Sorry to everyone if it seems I'm derailing this thread.

I think scientists are still debating about such topics to be honest. There was a book published in Germany some years ago by Thilo Sarrazin that - in short, I haven't read it, because I'm boycotting - postulated the existence of violence and stupidity genes in certain populations. Big scandal, that. There's been a lot of discussion around it in the scientific community. The truth is - not my own words, but that of a friend who is suffering from a bipolar disorder and my sister who studies medicine - that much still remains a mystery...there are some genetic predispositions, in some cases it seems like, but it's often difficult to distinguish between genetic predispositions and social inheritance patterns - as in, your parents are depressed, and you are too. Is it a genetic predisposition in your family, or is it the environment in which you grew up that has shaped your behavior? I like to think that we as humans, can be master of our own mind and feelings and that it is our social environment that shapes us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since this is my first post here i´m gonna say hello to everyone. :cheers:

I don´t wanna dig trough 8379476986 posts of this R + L = J theory to try and find has anyone asked the question who named the boy "Jon"?

Was it Eddard or Lyanna, and why that perticular name...

It is obvious the boy cannot have a "dragon" name for his own safety but was the choice to name him "Jon" Eddards way of "honnoring" his foster parent Jon Arryn or simply a random simple name that seemd to ryme good with "Snow".

If the first assumption is true, what the hell would Jon Arryn think about Eddard naming his BASTARD son after him? It´s bassicly an insult, just remember what Cersei tought about giwing Tywinn´s name to Lolly´s bastard... It makes no sense.

[...]

Why the hell was Eddard Stark fosterd in the Eyrie and who was Eddard Stark´s mother?

It's Ned who named Jon...Isn't there a SSM quote to back this up, somewhere? I'm not sure what Jon Arryn thought about it, but I don't think we can generalize based on how the Lannisters think/feel about such matters. Jon seems to be a pretty common name either way. We know two Jon Umbers, Jon Connington, Jon Arryn...

We don't know who Ned's mum is, only that his grandmother was a Flint, from the first Flints. There's an essay you can read if you're interested, with some interesting speculation: http://branvras.free.fr/HuisClos/Queen.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Welcome to the forum.

Since this is my first post here i´m gonna say hello to everyone. :cheers:

I don´t wanna dig trough 8379476986 posts of this R + L = J theory to try and find has anyone asked the question who named the boy "Jon"?

Was it Eddard or Lyanna, and why that perticular name...

http://www.westeros..../SSM/Entry/1202
5. Since all of their mothers died, who gave Jon Snow, Daenerys Targaryen and Tyrion Lannister their names?

Mothers can name a child before birth, or during, or after, even while they are dying. Dany was most like named by her mother, Tyrion by his father, Jon by Ned.

There is much that can be drawn from the way that GRRM answers the question, i.e. mother, father, Ned; so Ned is neither father nor mother, interesting. GRRM does not dispute or correct that Jon Snow's mother is dead.

It is obvious the boy cannot have a "dragon" name for his own safety but was the choice to name him "Jon" Eddards way of "honnoring" his foster parent Jon Arryn or simply a random simple name that seemd to ryme good with "Snow".

If the first assumption is true, what the hell would Jon Arryn think about Eddard naming his BASTARD son after him? It´s bassicly an insult, just remember what Cersei tought about giwing Tywinn´s name to Lolly´s bastard... It makes no sense.

I don't think that any character can be directly compared with Cersei. But we do know that there seemed to be a very strong bond between Jon Arryn and his fosters.

If the latter is true than the writer RR Martin himself, maybe left clues as to Jon Snow´s potentional destiny when he made a notion of a king Stark with that name:

This could mean Jon Snow is meant to defeat the WW when they inavde the north and bulid a new castle and maybe start a branch of his own. Note that RR Martin made this statement:

Since no mention of the personal coat of army has been made in the books so far it means it´s about to happen in the next 2 books and it means:

- Jon survives the stabbing to live in the human(since wolves need no banners) form

- Jon leaves the Nights Watch(they don´t allow personal banners)

- Jon by taking the wolf as his sigil doesn´t "persue" to inform other people to his Targ heritage or his claim to the throne...

Simply if R+L=J is true by judging RR Martins pacing and rythm of telling the story so far the relevation of this should have already happend to give way it having a big impact on the overall "political" developments in westeros. Not to mention that only Howland Reed can confirm this and he´s not exactly "Tywinn Lannister" meaning he´s not high up the realm hierarchy to have his word count for anything.

p.s.

Why the hell was Eddard Stark fosterd in the Eyrie and who was Eddard Stark´s mother?

Ned is probably fostered in the Eyrie to learn something of the southern culture, and maybe even to meet Robert.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think she really is just a wet-nurse, and was caring for Jon before Ned came into the picture.

If you breast-feed without interruption, lactation continues. It's not uncommon for children to be breast-fed until they are two or older especially in places where proper nutrition/hygiene might be problematic. If a wet-nurse means to make any money out of nursing, then she must know how to keep lactation going. Lysa Arryn was still nursing Robert...when he was five? so we can't say how old Wylla's babe/child was, but we can say that her babe/child was at the very least, one year older than Jon. I'm saying at the very least because 1) if Wylla is well known, and for the story to be believable that she is Jon's mother, it must appear that she could have had enough time to conceive a child and 2) a wet-nurse would probably want to wean her own child before giving any of her precious milk away.

The story Edric tells Arya, is the same that Ned tells Robert. Wylla, is officially Jon’s mother...I don’t think she had any child that was born at the same time as Jon, but rather, that Wylla was present for Jon’s birth or brought to the ToJ only a few days later...I think it’s quite possible that she was not a servant at Starfall, but came from a surrounding village and only started working at Starfall after RR, or possibly even, after Edric’s birth.

I don't think it makes much sense for Ned to bring Jon to Starfall and ask for a wet-nurse there. So IMO, Jon and Wylla either came 'together' or Ned found Wylla in a village not far off, and left Jon in her care so he could drop off the sword at Starfall. How many wet-nurses can there be around there? Not so many I think. It’s possible then, that Wylla was only came to work at Starfall when it was clear that Edric’s mother could not feed him and that it is only circumstances that made her both Jon and Edric’s wet-nurse.

I think Wylla must have had a baby who was almost exactly the same age as Jon because she is held out as Jon's mother. If she wasn't pregnant for months right before Jon's birth, her friends and family around Starfall or the other servants at Starfall would wonder how Eddard collected a new born baby from a woman who wasn't pregnant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Wylla must have had a baby who was almost exactly the same age as Jon because she is held out as Jon's mother. If she wasn't pregnant for months right before Jon's birth, her friends and family around Starfall or the other servants at Starfall would wonder how Eddard collected a new born baby from a woman who wasn't pregnant.

There is also possibility she wasn't in the Starfall at the first place. We don't know when she started working for Daynes. And since we know someone else was with Ned and Howland when they found Lyanna, we could even argue it was Wylla.

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...