R+L=J v 65

[Lady Gwynhyfvar]

I don't have the energy for this right now, but maybe some of you will:

http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/topic/99836-if-rlj-then-why-did-his-hand-burn/#entry5147088

[Arya kiddin']

The meaning of "ASOIAF" is still not known at this point.

Rhaegar said Aegon's song is the song of ice and fire, we don't know what it means yet, it could mean many things it doesn't necessarily mean that it is someone, some options of what it meant about Aegon..

1. He could take part in a battle which will be ASOIAF

He is the song of ice and fire

He will play a role in whatever it is

Rhaegar doesn't know what he is talking about

The only little bit GRRM spilled out on what it means, is that it has multiple meaning (about 3 I think he said) and he confirmed one of the meanings is that Dany's arc is in the fiery hot south/essos and Jon's arc is in the ice cold north.

Point 4.

Point 4.

Point 4.

Point 4.

It most certainly is Point 4.

[Mini Ghost]

Why were the Manderlys driven out of their own lands?

[Winds of Winter blow cold]

I'm not sure they were driven out, I just think it was a chance to move up.

[Old-Growth]

Alia of the Knife wrote:

"Jon is the one chained, and perhaps lifting those chains by freeing him of his oath is also waking the dragon, loosing him into the world."

That part of the prophecy, as quoted by Melisandre, says "dragons", meaning more than one. There already three loosed in the world. And please stop trying to fob off metaphorical dragons in place of real ones. Finally Dany is a dragon in the metaphorical sense and on the same pyre on which her dragons were woken from stone so, in the metaphorical sense, was she. She has it both ways, Jon as yet not even one. (A "rebirth" may be forthcoming, but it hasn't happened yet.)

[Old-Growth]

I'm not sure they were driven out, I just think it was a chance to move up.

Wylla and Wyman both say otherwise. See the chapter in which Davos visits Lord Wyman's court and later the one in which Davos meets with Wyman and Robett Glover (ADwD).

[WeirwoodTreeHugger]

Sorry if this has been mentioned a lot before, but does anybody else think that Jon will wind up explicitly having to make a choice between the name Stark and the name Targaryen. I know it's been discussed to death that he'll still see himself as a Stark and make the choice not to leave the wall. I'm envisioning a more literal choice.

He is presented at around the same time with two different pieces of information. He's given Robb's will legitimizing him and making him his heir, therefore he is the new king in the north. He is also given whatever evidence there is that he's Rhaegar and Lyanna's trueborn son, therefore he is king of the seven kingdoms by Targaryen succession. I assume he can't be both. Will he be forced in a council with the northern lords to decide to be Jon Stark or Jon Targaryen on the spot?

I imagine him becoming Jon Stark and never telling the rest of the world of his Targaryen lineage. Perhaps he strikes a deal with Dany or Stannis, whoever is left standing. The north gets independence if he agrees to never press his claim and destroy whatever evidence there is that he is a Targ. That should take the "it's so cliché" whine away right?

[Dr. Pepper]

Sorry if this has been mentioned a lot before, but does anybody else think that Jon will wind up explicitly having to make a choice between the name Stark and the name Targaryen. I know it's been discussed to death that he'll still see himself as a Stark and make the choice not to leave the wall. I'm envisioning a more literal choice.

I tend to think that even if he discovers his parentage or Robb's legitimizing him, he's already made his choice with name. "My name is Snow," as he said to Karstark.

[Old-Growth]

Sorry if this has been mentioned a lot before, but does anybody else think that Jon will wind up explicitly having to make a choice between the name Stark and the name Targaryen. I know it's been discussed to death that he'll still see himself as a Stark and make the choice not to leave the wall. I'm envisioning a more literal choice.

Why do think Dany will give him a choice? Same question for you Dr. Pepper.

[corbon]

Why were the Manderlys driven out of their own lands?

Why? Who knows. They were driven away by House Gardner, who were Kings of the Reach for at least 1000+years before that, and another 700 years after.

Why they were driven away is utterly open as we have no data at all on that point.

[Arya kiddin']

Why were the Manderlys driven out of their own lands?

For there fondness for pies.

[Greymoon]

Sorry if this has been mentioned a lot before, but does anybody else think that Jon will wind up explicitly having to make a choice between the name Stark and the name Targaryen. I know it's been discussed to death that he'll still see himself as a Stark and make the choice not to leave the wall. I'm envisioning a more literal choice.

He is presented at around the same time with two different pieces of information. He's given Robb's will legitimizing him and making him his heir, therefore he is the new king in the north. He is also given whatever evidence there is that he's Rhaegar and Lyanna's trueborn son, therefore he is king of the seven kingdoms by Targaryen succession. I assume he can't be both. Will he be forced in a council with the northern lords to decide to be Jon Stark or Jon Targaryen on the spot?

I imagine him becoming Jon Stark and never telling the rest of the world of his Targaryen lineage. Perhaps he strikes a deal with Dany or Stannis, whoever is left standing. The north gets independence if he agrees to never press his claim and destroy whatever evidence there is that he is a Targ. That should take the "it's so cliché" whine away right?

I agree with that, though I don't think there'll be a council, just Jon knowing the truth (perhaps first from a dream/through Bran) and not telling anyone. He might still wish to seek proof himself, and might appeal to his Targaryen heritage to broker a deal with Dany. I could see him claiming his Targ heritage if say, he believed Aegon to be real and thus his half-brother. But if he isn't sure about Aegon, he might well decide to keep it quiet. And even if he thinks Aegon is the real deal, he might feel that claiming his Targaryen heritage is a betrayal of Robb and Ned's memory.

[Lyse Stark]

Alia of the Knife wrote:

"Jon is the one chained, and perhaps lifting those chains by freeing him of his oath is also waking the dragon, loosing him into the world."

That part of the prophecy, as quoted by Melisandre, says "dragons", meaning more than one. There already three loosed in the world. And please stop trying to fob off metaphorical dragons in place of real ones. Finally Dany is a dragon in the metaphorical sense and on the same pyre on which her dragons were woken from stone so, in the metaphorical sense, was she. She has it both ways, Jon as yet not even one. (A "rebirth" may be forthcoming, but it hasn't happened yet.)

Remember my quote!!! GRRM's writing is subtle and multilayered, and you fail to appreciate it. I am sure you will be disappointed at the ending, especially because I believe the dragons in Mel's prophecy is metaphorical! And I also predict Daenerys will not be the winner; she will end up the loser, along with many others, while Jon Snow will end up on the throne cause he understands the spirit of kingship the best, and interprets it as duty, not powerlust that make or break kings.

I doubt it. I believe that Jon was meant to be king of all Westeros and unite all of Westeros in the fight against the Others. Remember that Rhaegar intended Jon to be the third head of the dragon, but it didn't work out as Gregor Clegane killed Rhaenys and Baby Aegon and their mother on Tywin Lannister's orders. So as a result, Jon Snow shall become the Three-headed Dragon. The three heads are as follows:Dragon

Direwolf

Man

Now how do it relates to the Stone beast breathing shadow fire vision at the HOTU?

Now it's where my interpretation comes in. Stone is DORMANCY. And the shadow fire is a hidden Targaryen identity.

Now I refer to my interpretation of Jojen's Winged Wolf vision. Wolf+Dragon = Winged Wolf.

The chains are the Night Watch's Oaths and the stone is the WALL.

Now do you get the image. The stone beast breathing shadow fire is a wolf with dragon wings. And the chains on him are oaths, and he is taking flight from the tower because he was freed from his oath and free to lead the fight against the Others in a Kingly capacity.

Remember this and mull this over! Read other threads about Jon Snow and think how horrible Daenerys would be as a queen, because she is not conciliatory, only destructive. She thinks "Dragons plant no trees." Now how would that lead her? It would lead her down a path that end up being her downfall, and she'll watch as Jon takes the throne, and unites Westeros into a cohesive whole, while she watches from afar, cursing her stupid choices that kept her from sitting the IT!

[Dr. Pepper]

Why do think Dany will give him a choice? Same question for you Dr. Pepper.

I don't really see her holding a dragon to the throat of someone and forcing them to accept a name she approves of. Even with her pending meet with Aegon, she may warn him against using her family name (if she believes he's false), but apart from killing him, there really isn't much she can do to force him to use a different name. Killing him kinda defeats the purpose.

I think that Jon has already made a choice. "my name is snow". He's owned it without denying who his family is or where he comes from. I don't really see him giving up this identity that he's accepted for himself in favor of Stark or Targaryen.

[FrozenFire3]

Yes, I think that the Rhaegar connection may be over-emphasised in this argument. I've seen no good reason not to believe that R+L=J but I don't agree that this means it his destiny to take the Iron Throne as the Targaryen heir.

Lyanna ran off, willingly or otherwise with Rhaegar. Her brother Ned went after her as brothers do, found her dying and brought home and raised her son, his nephew. Does there need to be more than this?

All Rhaegar wanted was a third child and Lyanna looked good for it. Once she was pregnant he left a substantial part of the Kingsguard behind as her jailers and after all the other Targaryens were dead or fled they rationalised this as protecting the new king. He himself in the meantime ended up very dead, gets referred to blandly from time to time in the books and even more rarely in the show - apart from Mormont's line that Rhaegar died. He did. He's dead as mutton and of no relevance to the story.

Jon on the other hand is looking for his mother (to be fair he believes Ned was his father) and in the end that will be the reveal; that he is the son of Lyanna. Rhaegar isn't important.

226 direct mentions. Not to count indirect references... blandly indeed.

I tend to stay away from the Heresy stuff. Not my bag. No offense.

In any case, I stand by what I said. Making Jon half-Targ is completely pointless if the fire element won't come into play somewhere.

I absolutely agree. It would be - narratively speaking - nonsensical.

Why would he have a low opinion of the Targs? Daeron I Targaryen was one of his childhood idols, and he has very good relations with Aemon. I think the Targaryen hate is something people interpret into Jon, not something he ever expresses himself.

Exactly. Both Aemon the Dragonknight and Daeron the Young Dragon feature heavily in Jon's childhood fantasies.

They were not little boys when they fought, but knights and mighty heroes. "I'm Prince Aemon the Dragonknight," Jon would call out, and Robb would shout back, "Well, I'm Florian the Fool."

"Daeron Targaryen was only fourteen when he conquered Dorne," Jon said. The Young Dragon was one of his heroes.

So much for Jon's dislike of Targaryens.

Targaryens are very present in Jon's narrative arc (no need to mention Maester Aemon), both directly and indirectly. Not to mention the steady fiery/dragon symbolism/imagery his chapters display.

I don't really wonder about Jon's peculiar role models. I can't help but wonder though, about GRRM's choice to give Jon such role models. The author has a narrative purpose, me thinks ;)

[Ygrain]

226 direct mentions. Not to count indirect references... blandly indeed.

Lol, the statistics can be nasty :D

[Alia of the knife]

I don't have the energy for this right now, but maybe some of you will:

http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/topic/99836-if-rlj-then-why-did-his-hand-burn/#entry5147088

Oh good lord.......

Alia of the Knife wrote:

"Jon is the one chained, and perhaps lifting those chains by freeing him of his oath is also waking the dragon, loosing him into the world."

That part of the prophecy, as quoted by Melisandre, says "dragons", meaning more than one. There already three loosed in the world. And please stop trying to fob off metaphorical dragons in place of real ones. Finally Dany is a dragon in the metaphorical sense and on the same pyre on which her dragons were woken from stone so, in the metaphorical sense, was she. She has it both ways, Jon as yet not even one. (A "rebirth" may be forthcoming, but it hasn't happened yet.)

:shocked:

Um, I was speaking in context of Jon as the chimera of wolf and dragon- the winged wolf.

Jon being released from his oath because of the assassination attempt, which IMHO is born of corruption of the NW, as well as the likely fall of the wall due to such corruption, is the conduit for his freedom to become what he is- a "dragon" awakened, awakened and one just as metaphorical as Dany.

And I'm not out to get Dany, because personally, I'm indifferent to her.

But, while I agree that she is going through a growth parallel in leadership akin to Jons with all the mistakes that go with it similar to Jons, she has taken up Viserys sense of entitlement with fair ease, rather than a distinction of duty, a distinction that even Varys makes regarding the tutelage of (f)Aegon on rule, though I hold he's not getting that part of the lesson.

And while I think that Jons destiny is greater than the IR, the fact that he was raised by dutiful Ned is telling.

[Ygrain]

A good catch by James Arryn over here:

http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/topic/66883-what-evidence-we-have-about-rhaegar-not-kidnapping-lyanna/?p=5147683

To clarify, Ned thinking Rhaegar would not visit brothels is not HS only subject on the matter.

After the quarrel about the assassination plot, he thinks about Robert's character and anger. He tells himself that Robert would not hurt him...not really...not after he calmed down.

Then suddenly and uncomfortably, He finds himself recalling Rhaegar. He considers that Robert hates him as much now as he did fifteen years ago, and finds that troubling.

That can be interpreted a few ways. Even if it's just a comment on Robert's capacity for blind rage, that's probably suggestive. That Ned thinks about it in the context of a situation where he feels Robert is clearly in the wrong and capable of acting on his anger anyway might be even more suggestive.

Again, though, Rhaegar comes to Ned's mind and Robert seems to be the only one he criticizes. That's twice.

[Lyse Stark]

Oh good lord.......

:shocked:

Um, I was speaking in context of Jon as the chimera of wolf and dragon- the winged wolf.

Jon being released from his oath because of the assassination attempt, which IMHO is born of corruption of the NW, as well as the likely fall of the wall due to such corruption, is the conduit for his freedom to become what he is- a "dragon" awakened, awakened and one just as metaphorical as Dany.

And I'm not out to get Dany, because personally, I'm indifferent to her.

But, while I agree that she is going through a growth parallel in leadership akin to Jons with all the mistakes that go with it similar to Jons, she has taken up Viserys sense of entitlement with fair ease, rather than a distinction of duty, a distinction that even Varys makes regarding the tutelage of (f)Aegon on rule, though I hold he's not getting that part of the lesson.

And while I think that Jons destiny is greater than the IR, the fact that he was raised by dutiful Ned is telling.

Exactly! Her sense of entitlement will be her downfall.

How? She will defeat fAegon, head to King's Landing, only to have Stannis's army of Others and Wights flank her. She will defeat them, only to arrive and see Jon Snow on the throne, all surviving Houses have already sworn fealty to him. He will then explain his belief that kingship is all about the DUTY to protect ALL the REALM from outside threats, like the OTHERS.

Jon then explains that he has stripped many of the Houses of their power and influence for their role in the games of thrones, and gave wardenships to Houses that actually care about protecting the people from the Others. He decides that if powerlust dooms kings, then dutiful kings will be the greatest rulers.

[Arya kiddin']

Exactly! Her sense of entitlement will be her downfall.

How? She will defeat fAegon, head to King's Landing, only to have Stannis's army of Others and Wights flank her. She will defeat them, only to arrive and see Jon Snow on the throne, all surviving Houses have already sworn fealty to him. He will then explain his belief that kingship is all about the DUTY to protect ALL the REALM from outside threats, like the OTHERS.

Jon then explains that he has stripped many of the Houses of their power and influence for their role in the games of thrones, and gave wardenships to Houses that actually care about protecting the people from the Others. He decides that if powerlust dooms kings, then dutiful kings will be the greatest rulers.

And we know this how exactly?