All dogs have 4 legs, not all animals with4 legs are dogs. Plus IIRC the Daynea had similar features.
BTW if R + L= J is not true, what other reason does Ned have to keep Jons mother a secret? If his mother was lowborn, nobody would care. If she was a highborn lady, then he might be a bit more discreet, but not so secretive as he is in story. if Ashara Dayne is Jons mother, why would he refuse to answer Cats queries?
Finally, did not Rhaegars children look more like their mother, a Mattell than their father?
I’ve always been a strong proponent of the R+L=J theory, mostly because of Dany’s vision in the House of the Undying:
Lyanna Stark was fond of blue roses, and there’s not a lot of room for interpretation on “wall of ice.”
There are also references in the first book to Ned promising to keep a secret for Lyanna. Rereading those scenes makes it easy to imagine she has just given birth, but that could naturally be deliberately ambiguous.
Most importantly, Ned never calls Jon his son.
(Most of this was unashamedly cribbed from the analysis of Jon’s parentage over at Tower of the Hand.)
For me, it’s the “bed of blood” reference that puts it over the top. It just points to the fact that there is no reason at all for her to die except in childbirth, and no mention at all of how she dies. If Rhaegar killed her after raping her, which seems really out of character, politically stupid, and pointless, I would think we’d hear more about the whys and hows of it. There’s no reason for her to have been killed in a crossfire of battle, and again, I think we’d know about it from Ned’s POV’s.
I’m really, really curious what the heck Robert (and the R+L=J-deniers) thought happened there. Was he just blind enough with rage to buy the idea that Rhaegar would go through all the trouble of kidnapping a noble lady just to rape her and kill her (when there are copious peasants and whores that would suffice).
It’s not an either/or proposition. R+L could be consensual without =J
My main issue with the theory is that it’s such a typical fantasy trope. The put upon bastard suddenly finds out he’s the heir to the throne? GRRM has spent 5 books turning every fantasy trope on its head but somehow this one will work out? It’s far more likely he put all these clues in just so he could pull the rug out from under his readers by, I don’t know, having a bunch of dudes stab Jon in the back or something.
Sure, it’s typical, but regardless of its tropeyness Jon is not the heir, nor would he be even if the entire Targaryen family died or renounced their claims. Rhaegar was still married to Elia and not to Lyanna, making Jon a bastard.
I was dismissive of the R+L=J theory, but you just convinced me. Possibly because I’m re-reading Book 1 in which Ned broods over the promise he made to Lyanna on her deathbed, without indicating what exactly the promise was or how she died. The blue flower on a wall of ice is another good clue - practically a giveaway.
Still that just makes Jon the bastard of Rheagar and Lyanna, instead of Ned and someone. He cannot be the heir to the throne; and even if he were, he’s bound to the Watch now.
One thing is that genetics apparently works differently in Westeros than it does on Earth. Specifically, Joffrey and Tommen having blond hair and blue eyes were enough to convince both Ned and Jon Arryn that they are the children of Jaime, despite the fact that their mother also has blond hair and blue eyes. What they must have discovered is that hair and eye color is inherited from the father.
On the other hand, I don’t know that George Martin knows or cares about this detail.
I can’t really take credit because I totally stole my evidence.
But now I’m thinking about the Mummer’s Dragon thing. I really need to reread books 4 and 5, because I totally took Aegon at face value, probably because working my way through the downward spiral of misery all the characters are mired in dulled my brain.
If Aegon is a fake (Faegon?), then that leaves one Dragon-Head spot open. I’ve always been resistant to Tyrion/Targaryen simply because, like his aunt said, he has his father’s brains. But maybe I’ll need to revisit that.
And since we’re bringing stuff up, I’ll also throw out the Alleras the Sphinx/Sarella the Sand Snake thing–naming coincidence or obvious clue?
There was further evidence–every one of Robert’s bastards Arryn and Ned tracked down looked like Robert regardless of their mothers’ appearance. Jon Arryn’s last words were “the seed is strong”–meaning that Robert’s genes packed quite a punch. Additionally, the history of Westeros nobility Arryn had in his possession clearly stated that historically, any pairing of Baratheon and Lannister produced children with the Baratheon coloring.
What convinced me was the line “he found her in her bed of blood” during the tower of joy dream sequence. When you first read it that makes no sense, but the books make it clear that bed of blood refers to child birth. So it is basically a fact that Lyanna died in childbirth and made Ned promise something on her death bed, everything else is just confirmation as to the identity of the child.
In other words, using real-world genetics: It’s extremely likely (though not 100% conclusive) that Robert had only the dominant dark-hair/dark-eyes genes and no recessive blond/blue-eyed genes to come out upon marrying a Lannister (who, being a blonde with blue eyes) would have only the recessive light-coloring genes.)
True, but that doesn’t explain L’s death. Childbirth does.
Oh, I have no belief that Jon will ever learn any of this. (In fact, Gendry learning his parentage in the show was a little too close to that trope for my tastes) In fact, if the series ends with no one finding out, and no confirmation, IMHO the existing clues are enough for me.
I could make a Punnett square and stuff, but that seemed like too much effort.
This. While I admit to being fond of the “This dude is your father, congrats on solving the mystery of your existence” ending, there are less than a handful of people alive who might still know the truth.
If Wylla’s alive, all she can confirm is that she is not Jon’s mother. Howland Reed likely knows the truth, and possibly Connington (who may be the absolute wrong name, but it was the one that came to my head). But it’s very likely Jon will never know the whole truth, even if he’s warging a dragon with his Aunt Dany exclaiming they must be related.
Howland Reed is the one that knows the truth, he is also the one that Maege Mormont and someone else were headed to with documents naming Jon Robb’s heir
Turning every fantasy trope on its head? Please. A few, maybe. I just can’t think of that many he is turning upside down, even after Googling fantasy tropes.
He adheres to just as many, or is at least well down the path. Magic, dragons, medievalism, and even good versus evil are all tropes he is perpetuating. He also breaks some tropes of “good versus evil” and I hope is setting readers up for a surprise in the ice versus fire conflict, but the tropes he is breaking seem fairly low impact apart from his willingness to kill characters in whom readers are invested.
For clarification, most of the characters are not purely good or evil. That is a good trope to break. On the other hand, to date there is clearly an evil personified by ice and the walkers, thus the fire/Red God is being set up as good. However, I think he may try to surprise readers and not necessarily follow the trope of ice=evil versus fire=good in the end.
I seem to recall lots of people in the books dying from causes other than childbirth.
My point being: the people who believe in this theory passionately are taking lots of minor things and claiming they all add up to one unavoidable conclusion and anyone who disagrees needs to come up with some elaborate alternative that answers everything.
Responses like “If she didn’t die in childbirth, then how did she die? Well?” aren’t the least bit convincing. I don’t know, but she was in a tower full of dudes fighting with swords during the middle of a war. It’s not like childbirth or inexplicable are the only options, just like rape and R+L=J aren’t the only options. Heck, those last two aren’t even mutually exclusive.
Refresh my memory. Other than in flashbacks, where have we seen Reed? And I don’t remember the thing about Mormont and the documents. [this is I why I am re-reading the books!]
