New clue on Jon parentage. SPOILERS WITHIN.

I'd be very surprised if Ser Barriston knows that R & J had a child. ( so hopefullly you are right and I end up very surprised).

I think the only two that know are Howland Reed, and Whylla (if she is even alive still).

Ambient Occlusion

This excerpt from AGOT on the Tower of Joy wiki page pretty much makes it too suspicious not to be true:

“I looked for you on the Trident,” Ned said to them.
“We were not there,” Ser Gerold answered.
“Woe to the Usurper if we had been,” said Ser Oswell.
“When King's Landing fell, Ser Jaime slew your king with a golden sword, and I wondered where you were.”
“Far away,” Ser Gerold said, “or Aerys would yet sit the Iron Throne, and our false brother would burn in seven hells.”
“I came down on Storm's End to lift the siege,” Ned told them, and the Lords Tyrell and Redwyne dipped their banners, and all their knights bent the knee to pledge us fealty. I was certain you would be among them.”
“Our knees do not bend easily,” said Ser Arthur Dayne.
“Ser Willem Darry is fled to Dragonstone, with your queen and Prince Viserys. I thought you might have sailed with him.”
“Ser Willem is a good man and true,” said Ser Oswell.
“But not of the Kingsguard,” Ser Gerold pointed out. “The Kingsguard does not flee.”
“Then or now,” said Ser Arthur. He donned his helm.
“We swore a vow,” explained old Ser Gerold.

titan18

Ambient Occlusion wrote: »

This excerpt from AGOT on the Tower of Joy wiki page pretty much makes it too suspicious not to be true:

“I looked for you on the Trident,” Ned said to them.
“We were not there,” Ser Gerold answered.
“Woe to the Usurper if we had been,” said Ser Oswell.
“When King's Landing fell, Ser Jaime slew your king with a golden sword, and I wondered where you were.”
“Far away,” Ser Gerold said, “or Aerys would yet sit the Iron Throne, and our false brother would burn in seven hells.”
“I came down on Storm's End to lift the siege,” Ned told them, and the Lords Tyrell and Redwyne dipped their banners, and all their knights bent the knee to pledge us fealty. I was certain you would be among them.”
“Our knees do not bend easily,” said Ser Arthur Dayne.
“Ser Willem Darry is fled to Dragonstone, with your queen and Prince Viserys. I thought you might have sailed with him.”
“Ser Willem is a good man and true,” said Ser Oswell.
“But not of the Kingsguard,” Ser Gerold pointed out. “The Kingsguard does not flee.”
“Then or now,” said Ser Arthur. He donned his helm.
“We swore a vow,” explained old Ser Gerold.

Aye, I dont really see why 3 Kingsguard would be guarding Lyanna if she wasn't pregnant with Rhaegar's son. Considering one is the Lord Commander of the Kingsguard and another is Dayne who is regarded as one of the finest knights ever. If Lyanna is just a prisoner, it makes no sense

kryogen

Thats the same as my reasoning above alright

madrab

i assume that the star wars reference means that he will either

a) fall for Deany when he meets her & then turn out to be his sister - oh the humanity!

or more fun...
b) His father is mance raider & Ygritte was his sister...nice!

I'm reluctant to accept the Rhaegar & Lyanna theory, possibly because I didn't pick up on it when the world and its uncle seems to have spotted in if the internet fora are to be believed.

However, there are a few things that don't quite sit right with me about it.

First of all, I wonder what exactly Ned's motivation is. It could be to keep Jon safe all his life or it could be to tell him later on about his birth and thus keep up the Targaryen, or perhaps it is as simple as he promised not to tell anyone so he keeps his promise and no more.

I don't really understand why he let Jon join the Night's Watch. If he wanted to keep Jon safe sending him to the wall isn't exactly the way to do it. If he wanted to keep the Targaryen line, he should have told Jon before he joined up to the Watch so that he could make an informed choice. If it is as simple as that he promised, it would explain why he doesn't really mind what Jon does if he goes off to the wall or whatever. When Robert dies, surely then woud be the time to tell Jon who he really is as he would then be out of danger?

Also, in relation to the incident where Cat finds out the rumour about Ashara and mentions it to Ned, he says never mention that name again, roots out those who told it to her and the rumour dies. If he was trying to protect Jon by not revealing that his da was Rhaegar, then why not keep up the rumour that the mother was Ashara Dayne?

Also, there is nothing to really disprove that it was Ashara Dayne or Wylla. While that would no doubt lead to a good surprise, I would've thought that there would be some clue as to that.

titan18 wrote: »

Aye, I dont really see why 3 Kingsguard would be guarding Lyanna if she wasn't pregnant with Rhaegar's son. Considering one is the Lord Commander of the Kingsguard and another is Dayne who is regarded as one of the finest knights ever. If Lyanna is just a prisoner, it makes no sense

Nor does it make sense that if they were protecting her they wouldn't try to make a deal with Ned. He was unlikely to kill his own sister after all. If they didn't trust Ned to keep Jon alive, why didn't get carry Jon to safety themselves by e.g. smuggling him off to a fishwife, then leave things lie? Perhaps they were afraid of the rest of the entourage, but if they were protecting her, they would have obeyed her orders and she would most likely have ordered them to send Ned up to her to get the baby and to keep the promise.

As to why three important kingsguard were there, the tower of joy could have been an important stronghold as it guards the princes pass between dorne and the rest of westeros. As battles were taking place near there, in summer hall, storms end and the battle of the bells place, it is entirely possible that they were sent there as part of an alliance with dorne and she was brought there so as to be out of the way during the fighting. I think Jamie or ser Barristan makes the point in book 5 that being a kingsguard and being a soldier on the field of batter are two completely different things. 3 of the other kingsguard were on the field of battle, but that doesn't mean that their position was meant for battle.

I don't think the suggestion that they were guarding royal blood holds water at all. First, even at its height, Lyanna and Rhaegar's son would be illegitimate. Elia died after Rhaegar, and their two sons were born before the Tower of Joy. Given the way that illegitimate children are treated in the books, he would have a very short life expectancy. His two other sons were not protected by Kingsguard at all - Jamie Lannister was the only one in Kingslanding and he was protecting Aerys. If this was because Kings Landing was considered to be safe, then it still doesn't explain why Viserys and his pregnant mother were not escorted by kingsguard when they went to Dragonstone.

johnnyskeleton: why do you think so much was made of the Targaryen's practising bigamy if not to provide an explanation for Jon to be a legitimate heir?

Pepe LeFrits

Ned's motivation seems pretty simple to me: he promised. He doesn't give a rats arse about the line. He keeps Jon safe until he grows into adulthood and joins the watch. Promise fulfilled.

Tenger

3 points to make:

-A line that always sticks in my mind is that Rhaegar told Jamie before he went to the Trident that there would be changes in Kings Landing when he returned. Perhaps Rhaegar would depose his mad father and/or change the way the Kingdom was run.

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

I'm reluctant to accept the Rhaegar & Lyanna theory, possibly because I didn't pick up on it when the world and its uncle seems to have spotted in if the internet fora are to be believed.

.....................I don't really understand why he let Jon join the Night's Watch. If he wanted to keep Jon safe sending him to the wall isn't exactly the way to do it. If he wanted to keep the Targaryen line, he should have told Jon before he joined up to the Watch so that he could make an informed choice. If it is as simple as that he promised, it would explain why he doesn't really mind what Jon does if he goes off to the wall or whatever. When Robert dies, surely then woud be the time to tell Jon who he really is as he would then be out of danger?.......

-I assume Ned thought Jon would be safer at the Wall than to let his parentage be known with Robert on the throne. He does tell Jon that he would talk about his mother the next time they meet. As a member of the Nights Watch he would be safe from Robert's hatred.
And by the time Robert dies Ned was a bit preoccupied with survival to be thinking of Jon.......but in the dungeon he kept thinking of his promise to Lyanna. (Who dies 'in her bloody bed')

-As for the rumour about Ashara Dayne, perhaps Ned loved her and then had to bring her dead brothers sword back to her family. Perhaps he was trying to protect her memory, this incident was before Ned and Catelyn had grown to love each other, their's was a marriage of political expediency.

Sleepy wrote: »

johnnyskeleton: why do you think so much was made of the Targaryen's practising bigamy if not to provide an explanation for Jon to be a legitimate heir?

But rhaegar had another, older son, and aerys had other children and it is reasonable to assume that children were occasionally miscarried or stillborn so I fail to see why jon would be so much more important than all the other targaryen children that he gets 3 kingsguard while the others get none.

Also, to what extent did they practice bigamy? Aegon the conqueror married both his sisters, to much disgust, and there are presumably a few others who did the same, but it was not routine for them to marry twice. The suggestion is that those kings who married twice were looked down on as the corrupt side of house targaryen. If rhaegar is the paragon of virtue necessary to support the whole theory of him and lyanna being lovers instead of him kidnapping her, and if he is breaking the mould by not marrying his sister, then why would he do something dishonourable like marry twice and if it was traditional to marry twice then he wasn't exactly doing something new.

Also, if it was cosher for them to marry twice and produce heirs from either wife, then why all the kidnapping business. Why not proposition her fair and square and fight Robert in a duel (thr honourable way). If he did that, then the starks wouldve been appeased and Robert might be dead.

So if it is the case that he married her, it is quite a stretch to fit. In that he is also thr honourable man that he is made out to be.

Again, though, I'm not saying the theory is wrong, just that it seems that the slightest suggestion of it is used to support the theory but if it is true there would be a significant number of unexplained actions by ned, rhaegar etc.

Pepe LeFrits wrote: »

Ned's motivation seems pretty simple to me: he promised. He doesn't give a rats arse about the line. He keeps Jon safe until he grows into adulthood and joins the watch. Promise fulfilled.

Exactly my point - if it is nothing more than promise fulfillment, why did he bother stamping out the rumour? It couldn't hurt and was helping keep jon hidden. Why did he even keep Jon, he couldve given him to howland Reid or to any number of random people where he wouldve been anonymous and therefore kept safe.

Tenger wrote: »

3 points to make:

-A line that always sticks in my mind is that Rhaegar told Jamie before he went to the Trident that there would be changes in Kings Landing when he returned. Perhaps Rhaegar would depose his mad father and/or change the way the Kingdom was run...

That could mean anything but even if he was going to reform or depose Aerys, I think that could go against the theory. If he was to replace the mad king with someone fair and honourable, why would he practice the targaryen old ways such as bigamy? Why wouldn't he explain the marriage to Ned, try to join forces with him and seek to depose aerys together? If he is supposed to be similar to Ned, then he would make his intentions plain at all times instead oftrying to be crafty.

Secondly, if aerys knew that his son was plotting against him, all the more reason to instruct his (not rhaegars) kingsguard to hold his love prisoner, which might explain the important kingsguard detaining her rather than a disproportionate number guarding her above others, higher up the line of ascent?

-I assume Ned thought Jon would be safer at the Wall than to let his parentage be known with Robert on the throne. He does tell Jon that he would talk about his mother the next time they meet. As a member of the Nights Watch he would be safe from Robert's hatred.
And by the time Robert dies Ned was a bit preoccupied with survival to be thinking of Jon.......but in the dungeon he kept thinking of his promise to Lyanna. (Who dies 'in her bloody bed')

telling jon himself doesn't make it common knowledge, and if the wall provided him with safety then he could easily tell jon as he was leaving winterfell and there would be nothing Robert could do. It just seems dishonest to me to let him make a life changing decision motivated by his illigitmate birth without first telling the truth.

-As for the rumour about Ashara Dayne, perhaps Ned loved her and then had to bring her dead brothers sword back to her family. Perhaps he was trying to protect her memory, this incident was before Ned and Catelyn had grown to love each other, their's was a marriage of political expediency.

all the more reason, one would think, to try to avoid fighting Arthur dayne.

There are clues either way but nothing conclusive and it seems to me that rhaegar and lyanna causes a few problems that a simple love affair with ashara dayne avoids. If it does turn out to be the case I would be dissappointed because it would seem then that grrm hadn't fully thought it through.

toodleytoo

I always got the impression that Mormont knew more about Jon Snow than he let on. In A Clash of Kings Jon mentions that he was looking at him in an odd way while explaining part of Maester Aemon and the other Targs' family history. The raven keeps calling him King as well.

Because he believes that Jon is the "Prince Who Was Promised"?

Pepe LeFrits

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Exactly my point - if it is nothing more than promise fulfillment, why did he bother stamping out the rumour? It couldn't hurt and was helping keep jon hidden. Why did he even keep Jon, he couldve given him to howland Reid or to any number of random people where he wouldve been anonymous and therefore kept safe.

Ned is rumoured to have been in love with Ashara, and it's perfectly keeping within his character to quash nasty, bull**** rumours about her after her death.

Also passing off Jon to someone else to look after him would hardly qualify as keeping him safe, certainly not to someone like Ned.

toodleytoo

Sleepy wrote: »

Because he believes that Jon is the "Prince Who Was Promised"?

I just re-read that scene in A Clash of Kings so that I could clearly explain what I meant there and I realised that he was more than likely just sizing up the likelihood of Jon fleeing due to Robb being made King.

“King,” croaked the raven. The bird flapped across the solar to land on Mormont’s shoulder. “King,” it said again, strutting back and forth.
“He likes that word,” Jon said, smiling.
“An easy word to say. An easy word to like.”
“King,” the bird said again.
“I think he means for you to have a crown, my lord.”
“The realm has three kings already, and that’s two too many for my liking.” Mormont stroked the raven under the beak with a finger, but all the while his eyes never left Jon Snow.
It made him feel odd. “My lord, why have you told me this, about Maester Aemon?”
“Must I have a reason?” Mormont shifted in his seat, frowning. “Your brother Robb has been crowned King in the North. You and Aemon have that in common. A king for a brother.”

Sorry, I meant Rhaegar. We hear at some point that he turns from a scholar to a warrior (believing himself to be that Prince), perhaps later in life he comes to believe that Lyanna must be the one to carry the child (or just when she gets pregnant he begins to believe it).

Aemon tells us what we know of that flavour of the prophecy and refers to discussing it with Egg so the Targaryen's (or at least the scholarly ones) certainly knew of it...

astrofool

Could it be L + A = J? Aerys bedding whoever he wants has been mentioned previously.

Or could Jon have been the infant that was Aegon (and a double switch played out)?

astrofool wrote: »

Could it be L + A = J? Aerys bedding whoever he wants has been mentioned previously.

Or could Jon have been the infant that was Aegon (and a double switch played out)?

Most theories focus on the idea of the lost heir, but if he is descended from the targareyns, so what? His claim wouldn't be stronger than danys or aegon (if it is really him) and in any event, does it really matter? Even if he does the old red god trick, he's still stuck up at the wall. Besides, the overriding rule in asofai is that kings are made by power, not by divine right (otherwise dany would be back already and stannis would be doing better than he is) so being descended from the targaryens doesn't matter very much.

So, from a plot perspective, i can't see how it makes a difference and, while grrm might have at one stage had a purpose to the jons mother question, i can't see it being of much greater relevance if his da was ned or rhaegar or some othe targaryen.

Three Dragons.

Three Riders.

Personally, I believe Aegon to be the "mummers dragon", quite likely descended from Bittersteel rather than the royal line that Dany (and presumably Jon) come from. Should Jon be legitimate, his claim would take precedence as Rhaegar's son than Dany's as his sister.

Sleepy wrote: »

Should Jon be legitimate, his claim would take precedence as Rhaegar's son than Dany's as his sister.

But who would legitimize him now?

He turned down Stannis when he offered it, Stannis is not likely to legitimize him if it means the Iron Throne will be Jon's by right and not his.

If Rhaegar had married Lyanna (precedent exists for bigamy within the Targaryen line), Jon would be legitimate.

Sleepy wrote: »

If Rhaegar had married Lyanna (precedent exists for bigamy within the Targaryen line), Jon would be legitimate.

Very true, had not thought of that. So he could be legitimate this whole time, except for swearing all of it away when taking The Black.

Only a King or death can free him of that vow now. Book 6 where are you??? :pac:

5starpool

Mr Freeze wrote: »

Very true, had not thought of that. So he could be legitimate this whole time, except for swearing all of it away when taking The Black.

Only a King or death can free him of that vow now. Book 6 where are you??? :pac:

What if he dies and is resurrected by Melisandre?

I'm thinking that'll be the loophole... reckon him warging into Ghost will play a part of it too...

5starpool wrote: »

What if he dies and is resurrected by Melisandre?

Exactly! That's the technicality that I hope will free him from his vow. Although I would prefer if he did not die, there are too many dead/risen again characters already.

Kess73

There is of course another way for him to die and come back. Was thinking along the lines of how they drown folk in the Iron Islands as part of their worship of the Drowned God and then resuscitate them.

That way he would have technically died and there would be no supernatural element to his return from the dead.

Sleepy wrote: »

Three Dragons.

Three Riders.

Personally, I believe Aegon to be the "mummers dragon", quite likely descended from Bittersteel rather than the royal line that Dany (and presumably Jon) come from. Should Jon be legitimate, his claim would take precedence as Rhaegar's son than Dany's as his sister.

How do you figure? Descent is not along formal lines so it's not clear that rhaegars son would rank higher than his brother or sister if he dies prior to takig the throne. More importantly, at the time of the birth of jon, there were many better claims to be heir, most notably rhaegars other son aemon. This is also to miss the very real issue that succession in got is not by right but by might.