Dunno, I think his paranoia and cruelty were very much on the unhealthy side, even if some of it was justified (I do suspect Varys's whispering had more substance than everyone in the books seems to think). Swift and severe punishments are one thing, but what we saw of him was downright sadistic, not to mention his treatment of his wife. So yeah, maybe not completely insane, but he certainly had some serious mental issues.
At the very least, he's a sadist, and that works for my Dany theory, as well. So we're cool ::thumbs up::
“Never forget what you are, for surely the world will not. Make it your strength. Then it can never be your weakness. Armour yourself in it, and it will never be used to hurt you.” ― George R.R. Martin, A Game of Thrones
Actually, I think Rhaegar might have been somewhat crazy as well (not saying he was, but the possibility is there). It's just harder to tell with the quiet ones. As Barristan says "It was said that no man ever knew Prince Rhaegar, truly."
Sounds like his behaviour was calm and thoughtful, so he doesn't seem mad, but that doesn't preclude subtle quirks of personality and judgement. Perhaps, like Aerys and unlike Viserys, he was (or seemed) OK early on, but started to develop issues towards the end. I mean, becoming a warrior to match a prophecy purely out of sense of duty and against his inclination is impressive, and arguably a good thing, but also something that can easily turn into something unhealthy. And one possible explanation for apparent stupidity could be that his judgement was in fact impaired. Though I'd prefer if it turned out not to be stupidity...
Valid arguments all. But, I think dragging Aerys' name through the mud was helpful for RR, and the subsequent reign of the Usurpers. Aerys was right to be mad. Half the realm was planning revolt. The other half was being hijacked by his son to depose him.
I will say there is no reason to mistreat his wife, but it's not like the man invented domestic violence.
I dunno, voice, I think there's a Targ predisposition toward madness...look at Viserys...and the one that drank wildfire to turn into a dragon. Plus, if he's not mad, my idea that Dany's crazy doesn't work...
I hear ya. Just sayin you can't expect to kidnap the king without consequences. Or trot around his gate threatening to murder his son, without expecting some serious Targaryen-style justice.
Now, just because Aerys might have been justifiably paranoid, doesn't mean his children can't be completely bonkers.
Dunno, I think his paranoia and cruelty were very much on the unhealthy side, even if some of it was justified (I do suspect Varys's whispering had more substance than everyone in the books seems to think). Swift and severe punishments are one thing, but what we saw of him was downright sadistic, not to mention his treatment of his wife. So yeah, maybe not completely insane, but he certainly had some serious mental issues.
Agree. But even our own government has tortured people. We can't expect a medieval fantasy King to turn the other cheek when it's slapped.
A broken clock is right twice a day,but i think the title "Mad King" may not have been earned.Well if you take the WB's account then he was a lil "coo coo."
"The world is full of obvious things which nobody by any chance ever observes"--Sherlock Holmes"
A broken clock is right twice a day,but i think the title "Mad King" may not have been earned.Well if you take the WB's account then he was a lil "coo coo."
I think any medieval king would boil the Stark that threatened his first-born son. Duskendale was an extreme case, but they did kidnap the king himself.
Other than that, there are the wildfire caches that were never used...
The man sat on a throne made from the partially melted swords of those who opposed it. Severity is kind of the name of the game when it comes to the dragonkings. If you poke a dragon, you best be fireproof.
"I can see it. You have more of the north in you than your brothers."
This line is of particular import, if we're linking imagery of blood, cloaks and oaths to Arthur:
"That name again. I don't think I'll fuck you after all, Littlefinger had you first, didn't he? I never eat off another man's trencher. Besides, you're not half so lovely as my sister." His smile cut. "I've never lain with any woman but Cersei. In my own way, I have been truer to her than your Ned ever was. Poor old dead Ned. So who has shit for honor now, I ask you? What was the name of that bastard he fathered?"
Catelyn took a step backward. "Brienne."
"No, that wasn't it." Jaime Lannister upended his flagon. A trickle ran onto his face, bright as blood. "Snow, that was the one. Such awhite name...like the pretty cloaks they give us in the Kingsguard when we swear our pretty oaths."
I just read this, Jon IV in Storm. I think it strengthens your argument, if Jon is related to TSotM:
Ghost was gone when the wildlings led their horses from the cave. Did he understand about Castle Black? Jon took a breath of the crisp morning air and allowed himself to hope. The eastern sky was pink near the horizon and pale grey higher up. The Sword of the Morning still hung in the south, the bright white star in its hilt blazing like a diamond in the dawn, but the blacks and greys of the darkling forest were turning once again to greens and golds, reds and russets. And above the soldier pines and oaks and ash and sentinels stood the Wall, the ice pale and glimmering beneath the dust and dirt that pocked its surface.
Even goes so far as to mention 'dawn' in the same sentence. Not connecting Lyanna and Arthur, but it sure made me think of Jon and Arthur...
“Never forget what you are, for surely the world will not. Make it your strength. Then it can never be your weakness. Armour yourself in it, and it will never be used to hurt you.” ― George R.R. Martin, A Game of Thrones
This line is of particular import, if we're linking imagery of blood, cloaks and oaths to Arthur:
I just read this, Jon IV in Storm. I think it strengthens your argument, if Jon is related to TSotM:
Ghost was gone when the wildlings led their horses from the cave. Did he understand about Castle Black? Jon took a breath of the crisp morning air and allowed himself to hope. The eastern sky was pink near the horizon and pale grey higher up. The Sword of the Morning still hung in the south, the bright white star in its hilt blazing like a diamond in the dawn, but the blacks and greys of the darkling forest were turning once again to greens and golds, reds and russets. And above the soldier pines and oaks and ash and sentinels stood the Wall, the ice pale and glimmering beneath the dust and dirt that pocked its surface.
Even goes so far as to mention 'dawn' in the same sentence. Not connecting Lyanna and Arthur, but it sure made me think of Jon and Arthur…
Great find!
And it doesn't just link them. Jon is feeling hope, in the dawn. Pink, yes, but also they grey (Stark). Mixing the grey with the Dawn and the Sword from the south--it's an image of hope and triumph over darkness.
The whole world is coming back into color vs. "Castle Black" from the first sentence and the night they've just been through.
The dawn even seems to restore the Wall--it shimmers beneath all the dirt/corruption/age--whatever has marred it. The ice is pale and glimmering, like the descriptions of Dawn--all that's missing is the phrase "milk glass."
This quote seems to have Jon connecting the Wall being "restored," the long night being overcome by dawn, in part because the Sword of the Morning is still there. I have problems with some of the logistics with ALJ, but the imagery in this quote--really makes it seem like Dawn and Sword of the Morning are necessary to overcome the Long Night. And that Jon is somehow needing to know that . . .
All art is at once surface and symbol. Those who go beneath the surface do so at their peril. Those who read the symbol do so at their peril. It is the spectator, and not life, that art really mirrors. Oscar Wilde.
First of all, this is a great essay, I loved it! Arthur is not my first choice for Jon's dad, but you certainly presented some good arguments in support of it being him. My lingering doubts stem mainly from these two questions (which perhaps you can answer?): 1) How does Rhaegar giving Lya the crown help Arthur to get with her? Was there a note hidden in the crown (pretty risky, if it's meant to be a secret)? and 2) Why did Ned have to fight Arthur to the death at the TOJ? Are you proposing Lyanna was in there? Or Jon? Why not let Ned in? (This is, of course, a question that NO theory I have read can answer convincingly, IMO)
But Ashara's daughter had been stillborn, and his fair lady had thrown herself from a tower soon after, mad with grief for the child she had lost,and perhaps for the man who had dishonored her at Harrenhal as well.
I wonder what he meant by "soon after"? The way I read this, the man who dishonored her is most likely the father of her child. But, going with conventional timelines, if she was knocked up at HH, she should have given birth months before the end of the Rebellion. Yet we know she was still alive when Ned went to see her, which was weeks (months?) after the Sack of KL. Had she already had the child at this point? Did she kill herself while Ned was still there? Where I'm going with this is that, perhaps, we have another case of imprecise timelines. If it's not that big of a deal to lose a few months, then this opens up all sorts of other possibilities for Jon's parentage as well. (Brandon + Ashara, for example, which is my own pet crackpot... one that does not, however, explain where Lyanna's child came from.) If Ashara could get knocked up at Harrenhal and give birth after the end of the Rebellion, why not Lyanna?
Of course, the question arises of how Barristan, a KG to Aerys, knows that she was dishonored at HH. Presumably, she didn't tell him, and neither did her lover. Is he only assuming this b/c she was later pregnant? Again, timeline problems here. If Ashara snuck off with a Stark, how would Barristan know what went on in that tent? It seems to me Barristan is only repeating what he heard from others, and we should take his testimony with a grain of salt.
“In Qohor he is the Black Goat, in Yi Ti the Lion of Night, in Westeros the Stranger. All men must bow to him in the end, no matter if they worship the Seven or the Lord of Light, the Moon Mother or the Drowned God or the Great Shepherd. All mankind belongs to him... else somewhere in the world would be a folk who lived forever. Do you know of any folk who live forever?”
1) How does Rhaegar giving Lya the crown help Arthur to get with her? Was there a note hidden in the crown (pretty risky, if it's meant to be a secret)?
Superunknown may have answered this question for me over in Heresy some time back. My understanding of it is that Arthur, defeated, asked his best friend to crown Lyanna in his stead.
2) Why did Ned have to fight Arthur to the death at the TOJ? Are you proposing Lyanna was in there? Or Jon? Why not let Ned in? (This is, of course, a question that NO theory I have read can answer convincingly, IMO)
Agreed, and it is certainly a pressing question. I hope @superunknown5 has some ideas on the matter. My own would be that Ser Arthur Dayne knew he needed to die in order for his son to be the SotM, and/or some greater Hero.
Of course, the question arises of how Barristan, a KG to Aerys, knows that she was dishonored at HH. Presumably, she didn't tell him, and neither did her lover. Is he only assuming this b/c she was later pregnant? Again, timeline problems here. If Ashara snuck off with a Stark, how would Barristan know what went on in that tent? It seems to me Barristan is only repeating what he heard from others, and we should take his testimony with a grain of salt.
While it may not enjoy a hundred and fifty volumes of exposition, I find Ned+Ashara as the most emotionally-pleasing scenario for Jon's parentage (rather than Brandon or Benjen getting under her skirt). You may be interested in the sources I provided for that scenario. Every mention of Ashara Dayne connects her specifically to Eddard Stark in a romantic relationship, except one, and that one is Barrisan, who still connects her to a Stark. Cat goes so far as to ask Ned if she is Jon's mother.
"I can see it. You have more of the north in you than your brothers."
Superunknown may have answered this question for me over in Heresy some time back. My understanding of it is that Arthur, defeated, asked his best friend to crown Lyanna in his stead.
I can buy that. But I'm also wondering--I can't find anything in the text saying whether or not Rhaegar took off his helm after he won and before he crowned Lyanna. Mojo was very obliging and looked, too--no mention of helm removal.
Text talks about his amazing armor and helm and streamers--makes him sound like my kid's Hello Kitty bicycle, quite frankly. But--did he take his helm off? If not, and if Arthur's hair is as light as Edric's. . .
Agreed, and it is certainly a pressing question. I hope superunknown5 has some ideas on the matter. My own would be that Ser Arthur Dayne knew he needed to die in order for his son to be the SotM, and/or some greater Hero.
Interesting--"there can be only one." Cue Queen.
We've got lot's of sacrifice in the novel. Ned sacrifices himself for Sansa--if a sacrifice was necessary, could definitely see Arthur doing that. Though why then: "he would have killed me if not for Howland Reed?"
Or perhaps Arthur was despondent over the mess, the impossible situation of being a failed KG to a dead king.
All art is at once surface and symbol. Those who go beneath the surface do so at their peril. Those who read the symbol do so at their peril. It is the spectator, and not life, that art really mirrors. Oscar Wilde.
Superunknown may have answered this question for me over in Heresy some time back. My understanding of it is that Arthur, defeated, asked his best friend to crown Lyanna in his stead.
So were he and Lyanna already having an affair? I guess my real question is: how could anyone expect Lyanna to know that Rhaegar was giving her the crown in Arthur's place? To her (and everyone else there) it would have looked as though Rhaegar was hitting on her. How does that help Arthur's cause?
Agreed, and it is certainly a pressing question. I hope superunknown5 has some ideas on the matter. My own would be that Ser Arthur Dayne knew he needed to die in order for his son to be the SotM, and/or some greater Hero.
Perhaps... but did he have to die right then? Would it not have been better to stick around and keep an eye on the kid, maybe even teach and mentor him? Of course he couldn't admit that it was his child, but he could have taken the baby to Starfall, or let Ned foster him. And how did he get the other two KG to play along? If he was the one who needed to die, he could have met Ned alone.
Again, I realize this applies no matter who Jon's dad is, but the KG "sacrifice" idea really bothers me. Three fantastic knights, loyal to a fault, did not participate in protecting the royal family nor did they fight at the Trident. Instead, they are guarding a tower in the middle of nowhere. It doesn't seem, to me, that honor would compel them to pick a random place and wait for Ned to come kill them. They must have had a reason for being there- otherwise the honorable thing would have been to die for their cause in KL, or the Trident, or Storm's End... all the places Ned was surprised not to have found them.
Indeed it does. And really, I have a sneaking suspicion that Jon is older than is claimed anyway...
Do bastards really grow up faster than other children, Luwin? Somehow, I think not.
Agreed! I find it very plausible that Jon was conceived at Harrenhal, and is older than Robb. GRRM is vague with such things - for example, the line that Jon was a "babe in arms" during the last winter, which was 10 years ago, making him 4. Or Aegon being an infant, but also between 1 and 2 years old. He seems to think there is not much of a difference, give or take a year or so... and really, it's hard to tell a baby's exact age. I've heard the argument that Cat would have noticed he was older than her own baby- but would she really? Robb was her first, so she wasn't exactly an expert. And she hated Jon - would she really have spent a lot of time musing on his exact age? And why would she suspect Ned of lying about this in the first place?
While it may not enjoy a hundred and fifty volumes of exposition, I find Ned+Ashara as the most emotionally-pleasing scenario for Jon's parentage (rather than Brandon or Benjen getting under her skirt). You may be interested in the sources I provided for that scenario. Every mention of Ashara Dayne connects her specifically to Eddard Stark in a romantic relationship, except one, and that one is Barrisan, who still connects her to a Stark. Cat goes so far as to ask Ned if she is Jon's mother.
I agree that there is a lot of evidence for a Ned/Ashara relationship, and it would certainly help explain Ned's sadness and regret when he thinks back on the Rebellion. My only concern with this scenario is that it doesn't explain the extreme secrecy surrounding Jon's parentage. If he is Ned and Ashara's love child, why can't people know?
I have one potential answer, maybe. So, when Robb married Jane, Tywin explains this (outwardly incredibly stupid and dishonorable) act by saying that, once he had deflowered her, he had to marry her. So if Ned and Ashara hooked up at HH, honorable Ned would have felt compelled to marry her (and at the time, there was no reason not to). So off to the weirwood they went- no priest required. Maybe Howland was their witness, or maybe not. Ok, so then the Rebellion happened, and Ned had to marry Cat to secure the Tully men. As nobody knew about Ashara, he could do this. After it's all over, he goes to see Ashara at Starfall. When she learns that he has married another, she jumps off the tower (or runs off to Volantis), leaving him with the baby...
Ok, so the secrecy part. If Ned and Ashara were wed, Jon is legitimate, and heir to Winterfell (b/c he is older than Robb). However, Cat already hates him, and the Tullys would feel extremely cheated if Cat's son was not going to be the heir. Telling anyone would endanger the Stark/Tully alliance, further alienate Cat, and likely endanger Jon, as his death would open the door for Robb to be heir. So Ned keeps it to himself. He doesn't even tell Jon, b/c by telling him, he would risk a Dance of the Wolves over the rights to WF.
Of course, if Jon is Ned and Ashara's child, then we still have no clue what went on with Lyanna. It certainly seems as though she had a child as well. And GRRM's initial "Jon + Arya" idea suggests Jon is not Ned's son. I suppose this is where the other mystery babies come in. Aegon could be Ned and Ashara's kid, for example, and Jon could still be Lyanna's. Or Aegon could be Lyanna and Rhaegar's kid. We also have Barristan's comment on how Dany could be Ashara's daughter, she looks so much like her (and the stillborn child was said to be a girl). Then again, N + A would provide no dragon blood, so I tend to think Dany is who we think she is (but def. didn't grow up in Braavos...). Grrr, so many mysteries!
“In Qohor he is the Black Goat, in Yi Ti the Lion of Night, in Westeros the Stranger. All men must bow to him in the end, no matter if they worship the Seven or the Lord of Light, the Moon Mother or the Drowned God or the Great Shepherd. All mankind belongs to him... else somewhere in the world would be a folk who lived forever. Do you know of any folk who live forever?”
Agreed, and it is certainly a pressing question. I hope superunknown5 has some ideas on the matter. My own would be that Ser Arthur Dayne knew he needed to die in order for his son to be the SotM, and/or some greater Hero.
Wait! I think I just got where you are going with this--either that or I'm crack potting. Either way: slow brain walking here.
BeautifulBacon's argument about the magic of the tent and the tower; the repeat of 7 against 3; the repeat in the novel of sacrifices that may not have been intended, but still end up being "death pays for life;" the magic in the tent takes TSTMTW, but the fight at the tower leaves Jon alive and with the man who will love him as his own and take him north, where he needs to be--Arthur wouldn't have to know that his death and/or the deaths of the others at the tower (7 against 3) could be a sacrifice for Jon (wherever Jon is). But it could still work.
To blatantly co-opt some of the quotes @superunknown5 uses above:
Quote: "Jaime had laid his sword across the Warrior's knees, piled his armor at his feet, and knelt upon the rough stone floor before the altar. When dawn came his knees were raw and bloody. "All knights must bleed, Jaime," Ser Arthur Dayne had said, when he saw. "Blood is the seal of our devotion." With dawn he tapped him on the shoulder; the pale blade was so sharp that even that light touch cut through Jaime's tunic, so he bled anew. He never felt it. "- Jaime, AFfC
Quote: "Jon fell to his knees. He found the dagger's hilt and wrenched it free. In the cold night air the wound was smoking. "Ghost," he whispered. Pain washed over him. Stick them with the pointy end. When the third dagger took him between the shoulder blades, he gave a grunt and fell face-first into the snow. He never felt the fourth knife. Only the cold" … - Jon, ADwD
Is this how the Sword of the Morning is chosen? Or made? Is this why the constellation presents itself to Jon, glowing like the Wall?
All art is at once surface and symbol. Those who go beneath the surface do so at their peril. Those who read the symbol do so at their peril. It is the spectator, and not life, that art really mirrors. Oscar Wilde.