Hehe, yeah that would be lame if they both died willingly. (Although we don't know that Ashara jumped from the tower. In the WB there are several example of girls- mostly Targaryens- who "may have jumped, or may have been pushed".)
Blazfemur, over on Westeros, has a favorite crackpot:
Ashara: LOVE ME Ned! Love me! Or I'll tell everyone Lyanna's secret!
Ned: Why you. . . . !!!!! *pushes her out the window*
Back to seriousness--if Jon's not in that tower, really think what the KG are doing is "we may have no real hope, but we'll go down fighting and take as many as we can with us." Could he have that mindset if he'd Jon's dad? Ned was willing to be executed rather than admit guilt. Until Varys talked him out of it for Sansa. . .
Great point. And a problem for any theory that is not RLJ...
Yeah--my best way to fix this is that R took L for some political reason. Then A and L fell for each other. But. . . that's pure speculation. Logistics are hard!!!
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.
SlyWren said;Had no time to post but managed to turn myself into the de facto defender on an ALJ thread over on Westeros. No idea why I did that.
Saw that and went, hmmmmm? :-)
Yeah. I got unreasonably protective when the OP was really basic--but OP only got rude, terse, unthought-out responses. I ended up defending the basic argument while also arguing with the OP. Nutso.
Sent my brain into a fugue re: Jon as Sword of the Morning. I think I've proved it (words to rue in unfinished texts--but I really think I have)--actually posted my complete theory to stop my brain from spinning. All quiet now.
So, just need to stay away from protecting mode and my brain should stay sane.
I double checked the family tree in the world book. King Maekar was married to Lady Dyanna Dayne. This would make her Rhaegar's great great grandmother. The funny thing is, that she is also Robert Baratheon's great great grandmother.
Thanks! So, she's Rhaegar's great great grandmother on both sides. Huh. Does that down her to just "great grandmother?" Now I need to find a geneticist (said the bird whose best friends are all actors).
I can't say that I know a lot myself. Most of what I do know has been from the forums or quick looks at Wikipedia, etc. However, one of the big things linked to Mithraism seems to be the Taurotony. It depicts Mithras slaying a bull, usually depicted as white. Mithras does not want to slay the bull but is commanded to do so by, I think the sun god. The result of the sacrifice is food and bounty, etc. I'm sure there's more to it than that, but that was my very basic understanding of that part of it. The thing that I find strange is that it always seems to be depicted as a white bull and we have a character known as the White Bull. It may be completely unrelated, but it sticks in my brain for some reason. I will say that the majority of times I have seen the Taurotony referred to, it has been in relation to Jon Snow and his possible role as a corn king, so I may be well out in left field here.
This would be really interesting if it pans out. Would potentially have implications both for @beautifulbacon and kingmonkey and their respective essays on the tower.
Will keep and eye out for any other bull references in the novels. I've been Arthur and sword focused--but that should be out of my system now.
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.
Back to seriousness--if Jon's not in that tower, really think what the KG are doing is "we may have no real hope, but we'll go down fighting and take as many as we can with us." Could he have that mindset if he'd Jon's dad? Ned was willing to be executed rather than admit guilt. Until Varys talked him out of it for Sansa. . .
Well to be fair, Ned was willing to be executed rather than confess to a crime he didn't commit - there was no guilt to admit to. It would have been honorable to die rather than tell a lie and pretend to be a traitor. Arthur, if he was the one who stole Lyanna, would do the honorable thing by admitting it and facing the consequences. In fact, he should have done so long ago, and maybe his BFF and his entire family wouldn't be dead. I find it hard to reconcile Arthur as the father (and therefore, partly at least, instigator of the war) with Ned's continued high opinion of him. But of course that applies to other candidates as well. Ned speaks fondly of the Reeds, for example, and I don't remember hearing him ever say or think anything negative about Rhaegar either. Or about Lyanna. Which may imply she either was truly stolen, or she truly didn't know what was going on while she was missing.
“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?”
Well to be fair, Ned was willing to be executed rather than confess to a crime he didn't commit - there was no guilt to admit to. It would have been honorable to die rather than tell a lie and pretend to be a traitor.
Yeah--I phrased that very badly. I meant what you said--wouldn't admit guilt to the crime they accused him of. Not "admit his actual guilt."
Arthur, if he was the one who stole Lyanna, would do the honorable thing by admitting it and facing the consequences. In fact, he should have done so long ago, and maybe his BFF and his entire family wouldn't be dead. I find it hard to reconcile Arthur as the father (and therefore, partly at least, instigator of the war) with Ned's continued high opinion of him.
Agree with all of this. This is one of the reasons I can't let go of RLJ yet--why on earth didn't Rhaegar and/or Arthur say something about Lyanna if the Targs weren't the instigators? It would be honorable for both, but especially Arthur, to admit what's happening.
Granted, once Rickard and Brandon were dead, not sure the admission would have done much good. But still--why not say something?
Ned's high opinion of Arthur--I have to admit it troubles me per se. If he only helped take Lyanna with/for Rhaegar, am still surprised he gets the highest praise. The Old Bull is one of the names Bran knows like music. So, he's praised, too. But not like Arthur. Why on earth is he praised so highly? It has to be about more than fighting, I think.
But of course that applies to other candidates as well. Ned speaks fondly of the Reeds, for example, and I don't remember hearing him ever say or think anything negative about Rhaegar either. Or about Lyanna. Which may imply she either was truly stolen, or she truly didn't know what was going on while she was missing.
Yup--Ned was a really uncooperative narrator at times. Almost like he didn't know he was narrating a novel. Trying to figure out what he thought about a lot of things--huge gaps.
Still, as you said, he singles Arthur out for praise--why? Especially if Arthur is Jon's father?
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.
I still wonder if we need to consider the idea that Lyanna's disappearance was more of a failed rescue attempt as opposed to a kidnapping, possibly resulting in a forced lack of ability to communicate. It's the only way that I have been able to make any semblance of sense out of the whole thing in my mind. It would really go a long way in explaining a lot.
Why must I always be the isle of crazy alone in an ocean of sensibility? The should to everybody else’s shouldn’t? The I-will to their better-nots?
Ned's high opinion of Arthur--I have to admit it troubles me per se. If he only helped take Lyanna with/for Rhaegar, am still surprised he gets the highest praise. The Old Bull is one of the names Bran knows like music. So, he's praised, too. But not like Arthur. Why on earth is he praised so highly? It has to be about more than fighting, I think.
I agree - there is more to the Ned/Arthur relationship than we know. Ned tells Bran Arthur was the greatest knight he ever knew - and knowing Ned, this did not just refer to him being an excellent fighter. He seems to have had a very high opinion of him as a man, not just as a knight. And we know this was somewhat mutual, as the Daynes then named their heir after Ned. Why would they do this, after he killed Arthur, knocked up Ashara and she ended up killing herself? Something must have happened to result in the mutual respect and even admiration between Ned and house Dayne. It's too bad everything we get from the text suggests they should hate each other - and that certainly includes Arthur's involvement in Lyanna's fate. And if he is the father, and Ned knows, the whole thing makes even less sense...
“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?”
It is just that oddness that slants me toward the Daynes as SOMEONE 's parents. Ashara is either Dany's or Jon's mother. Arthur is Jon's dad if Ashara isn't involved in his making. There is a big fat arrow pointing at Dorne, and not enough clues to narrow it further, at least for me.
It is just that oddness that slants me toward the Daynes as SOMEONE 's parents. Ashara is either Dany's or Jon's mother. Arthur is Jon's dad if Ashara isn't involved in his making. There is a big fat arrow pointing at Dorne, and not enough clues to narrow it further, at least for me.
Same here, so I hope it isn't oddness.
I see the same big fat arrow pointing at Dorne, and Starfall specifically. And the Palestone Sword Tower of Starfall, even more specifically.
Valyrians are Fire like the Others are Ice. Unnatural.
The Dornish are Fire like the Starks are Ice. Human. And, ancient Houses of the First Men.
"I can see it. You have more of the north in you than your brothers."
I agree - there is more to the Ned/Arthur relationship than we know. Ned tells Bran Arthur was the greatest knight he ever knew - and knowing Ned, this did not just refer to him being an excellent fighter. He seems to have had a very high opinion of him as a man, not just as a knight. And we know this was somewhat mutual, as the Daynes then named their heir after Ned. Why would they do this, after he killed Arthur, knocked up Ashara and she ended up killing herself? Something must have happened to result in the mutual respect and even admiration between Ned and house Dayne. It's too bad everything we get from the text suggests they should hate each other - and that certainly includes Arthur's involvement in Lyanna's fate. And if he is the father, and Ned knows, the whole thing makes even less sense...
Unless--WARNING: complete crackpot coming up:
What if the lie about Jon's parentage has absolutely nothing to do with protecting Jon from Robert? What if it's about protecting Jon from the truth about how Ned killed Arthur? Or just that Ned killed Arthur.
We've seen Ned lie to Cat to protect her from miserable truths: how Brandon and Rickard dies. The only reason to keep that story under wraps is to spare people horror. What if it's the same with Jon? Ned can't bear contemplating what it would mean to tell Jon the truth--like he lies to Barra's mother in the brothel.
So--the Daynes respect Ned because he brought back the sword and defeated Arthur. They might even respect him for protecting Jon from the truth until the boy is old enough. And Ned both respects Arthur and feels guilty over his death. So--mutual respect and grieving. . . maybe.
I know it sounds screwy--but Ned's told a few screwy lies, strictly out of sentiment and delicacy.
It is just that oddness that slants me toward the Daynes as SOMEONE 's parents. Ashara is either Dany's or Jon's mother. Arthur is Jon's dad if Ashara isn't involved in his making. There is a big fat arrow pointing at Dorne, and not enough clues to narrow it further, at least for me.
I see the same big fat arrow pointing at Dorne, and Starfall specifically. And the Palestone Sword Tower of Starfall, even more specifically.
Valyrians are Fire like the Others are Ice. Unnatural.
The Dornish are Fire like the Starks are Ice. Human. And, ancient Houses of the First Men.
Or--the Daynes have a history not of magical ice or fire. They have a tradition of being guardians. Humans who protect others--the greatest Knight I ever saw. So, not a mix of ice and fire, but an assertion of humanity. Light and goodness.
Maybe.
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.
I don't have anything new to add, I just want to say I can't believe this thing has almost 2,000 views. Wow.
Don't know if you've had time to peruse, but Arthur and Dayne threads keep popping up over on Westeros. New ones and older resurrected ones.
I think your essay's got people thinking.
And shoutout to wolfmaid7 for the Heresy Project that still attracts hundreds ETA: thousands (when you look at all of the Heresy essays) of views even on a small forum! ::: ::: :::
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.
I still wonder if we need to consider the idea that Lyanna's disappearance was more of a failed rescue attempt as opposed to a kidnapping, possibly resulting in a forced lack of ability to communicate. It's the only way that I have been able to make any semblance of sense out of the whole thing in my mind. It would really go a long way in explaining a lot.
I finally picked up on this post and think I'm starting to see where you might be going with this. So--are you assuming that Lyanna's "rescue" went south enough (bad pun) to require silence? Rescue by. . . Rhaegar? Arthur?
I'm only following you so far here. . . .
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.
Post by whitewolfstark on Oct 23, 2015 0:12:54 GMT
I think what Lady Dy is saying is that someone kidnapped or wanted to seize Lyanna, and someone like Rhaegar or Arthur had to go to a lot of danger to rescue her, enough that it was a big risk to let any communication out.
I think what Lady Dy is saying is that someone kidnapped or wanted to seize Lyanna, and someone like Rhaegar or Arthur had to go to a lot of danger to rescue her, enough that it was a big risk to let any communication out.
Yes. . . that might fit with the potential parallels with the killing of Lady.
And with Arya and Nymeria--Arya gets herself in a bind, runs away--away from her family and her guards.
Did Lyanna do the same? Get found by Arthur? Ned call Arthur the "finest knight" not the "finest Kingsguard." Is this because he did the knightly thing and protected the weak and innocent? Protected Lyanna? But Ned didn't know that until after her and Howland had wounded him beyond helping?
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.
I think what Lady Dy is saying is that someone kidnapped or wanted to seize Lyanna, and someone like Rhaegar or Arthur had to go to a lot of danger to rescue her, enough that it was a big risk to let any communication out.
I had to go back and read through the comments again to be sure, but, yes, that's generally what I was saying, at least at the time.
I finally picked up on this post and think I'm starting to see where you might be going with this. So--are you assuming that Lyanna's "rescue" went south enough (bad pun) to require silence? Rescue by. . . Rhaegar? Arthur?
I'm only following you so far here. . . .
Which is probably a good thing, since it took me a bit to remember what it was exactly that I was saying. My original thought was that Aerys had ordered Lyanna taken for whatever reason and Rhaegar took it upon himself to rescue her, with the help of Arthur Dayne, of course. I'm starting to question a completely crackpot idea that occurred to me recently as well.
Yes. . . that might fit with the potential parallels with the killing of Lady.
And with Arya and Nymeria--Arya gets herself in a bind, runs away--away from her family and her guards.
Did Lyanna do the same? Get found by Arthur? Ned call Arthur the "finest knight" not the "finest Kingsguard." Is this because he did the knightly thing and protected the weak and innocent? Protected Lyanna? But Ned didn't know that until after her and Howland had wounded him beyond helping?
As opposed to Aerys ordering her taken, I'm finding this scenario more and more likely. My original thought was that Rhaegar drew Aerys's attention to Lyanna through crowning her at Harrenhall, causing him to go after her. And although this is possible, I wonder... Did Lyanna run away? What happened to make her do this if she did? Let's look at the blue roses again. When Rhaegar crowned Lyanna, from the reaction of the crowd, it could also be seen as a threat. But a threat of what? Now let's look at wolfmaid7's take on what the crown represents. Lyanna is not a maiden. But if she's getting it on with Robert, who cares? She's already betrothed to him. What would spell downfall for the Starks and their Southern Ambitions? Why Lord Rickard claiming the maidenhead of his one and only daughter. At the very least that would jeopardize the North's relationship with the Stormlands and possibly the Vale as well. Certainly a reason for Lyanna to run away. An awfully good reason to not let the Starks know where she is as well. Look at the Sansa parallels as well. LF, who is currently Sansa's father figure, is treating her any way but fatherly. Did Lyanna run away posing as a bastard, herself? Did someone, i.e. Arthur then steal her? Just like Jon with Ygritte, I didn't know you were a girl until my blade was at your throat.
Why must I always be the isle of crazy alone in an ocean of sensibility? The should to everybody else’s shouldn’t? The I-will to their better-nots?