R+L=J

Actually KM we are NOT told Lyanna "thinks" Robert is a bad match what we see very clearly is her voicing her concern and belief at the time that Robert would never be failthful "to her" by which case he has to prove her wrong or right.Her running off "without" reasons specific to her never happened.In fact Robert and Lyanna are most perfectly matched/suited (wait for essay) the only issue for her was his fidelity to her.It comes down to with respect to her was she right or wrong (wait for essay)

I agree the romantic path holds no water,the rape to me holds no water and the prophecy angle also holds no water.The last two we can discuss when i get back from work.You say it's more sinister and also say it could be rape but can you explain what you think occured?



This is it right here.I brought this up on another thread that we needed to look back in history at these "love stories" and see if they were that.GRRM is playing with perception not just to the characters but to us as fans.And i've said this before and answer KMs question about the glue. Absence of evidence is absence of evidence.If in over 5 books one can't find the glue that ties these two together then its unlikely it exists. We have a common perception that Rhaegar loved Lyanna.We have two people who knew Rhaegar,one very closely who can't provide details.For all this common knowledge no one can tell us anything Rhaegar said at all concerning Lyanna...There's nothing there and that's a red flag.These people are living in a fairy tale mindset,where things are grand and the singers romanticize everything.However,when you look at the story its clear to see the glamour in the tale.

Ps.KM all alternatives haven't been presented so hold off on the "no glue for them"I also dont get the "absence of evidence"which sounds like an argument from ignorance fallacy to me to which I will say lets see if we can go the other route.

This would be AWESOME. The NW and the wildlings all hate Mel (the wildlings more than the NW, I think) - I could totally see them deciding to pay her back for burning Mance. I'm not sure they would hurt the baby- but the Queen's men would. Maybe the baby is burned first, by Mel, triggering a wildling uprising that ends in Mel and all her followers also being burned. Val is conveniently around to make use of all these sacrifices...

Not at all. Absence of evidence is not necessarily evidence of absence. In such a case as we would expect to find evidence, and that evidence is absent, then the absence of evidence is evidence of absence. This is a case where we have no reason to assume that we should find evidence (specifically, it's a subject the author has a clear intent to keep mysterious), thus the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Every single piece of information we have about the abduction comes from other people. The only one of those who knew anything directly was Ned, and what we have from Ned is vague and ambiguous to say the least.

I suggest that Lyanna and Rhaegar were a thing because, even though we have not seen the glue, there's a ton of other evidence that points to it. My point is that it is not an argument against Lyanna and Rhaegar that we do not know the whys and wherefores, it just means that we have a gap in our knowledge, which cannot be a basis for judgement. To say that Lyanna and Rhaegar were NOT a thing because we don't know the whys and wherefores would be an argument from ignorance, because it would be making an argument based on a lack of information. Conversely, to claim that they WERE a thing solely because we don't have evidence of anyone else fathering Jon would be an argument from ignorance for the same reason.

But KM that doesn't make sense we have a reason in a story that is heavy with unreliable narrations,faulty perceptions and logic.I reject that fallacy on the basis of the author putting clues,though subtle and prime for praying on the perception of characters and readers.We are now 5 books deep in this tale  and there's absolutely nothing by way of first hand information from someone like JonCon and Barristan.There should be evidence of mutual love or even singualr love  if it existed we can't just assume without any evidence that its there and the author chose not to show it because it wasn't important and its not the mystery.

I'm not saying that Rhaegar and Lyanna wern't  a thing because we don't know the why's .Therefore that can't be an arguement from ignorance .Your saying there isn't enough info ,i'm saying we do have sufficient info and I'm asaying they weren't a thing because there's no evidence no glue that sticks them together intimately based on 5books of information and atleast 3 intimates who made non insider information about Lya and Rhaegar or non at all.


Ok ,we are getting down to the nitty gritty ,what is the "ton" of evidence that there existed a mutual relationship between Lya and Rhaegar?

This i'm not buying and we'd have to agree to disagree on this. I'm not arguing Barristan's belief,i never have.I've argued that he has no insider information.Same goes for JonCon they don't have any insider information and are just regurgitating a wildly held belief based on their interpretation of what Rhaegar did.Which was he crowned her,ran off with her ergo he must have loved her.I'm saying the basis whereby such conclusions are made is flawed because we don't have anything subtle or overt that validates Rhaegar's feelings about Lyanna or Lyanna's feelings about Rhaegar.

My arguement is this there is a wildly held belief that Rhaegar and Robert loved Lyanna...So far so good? What is lacking is "information" to prove the claim of the former.Now any information i.e Rhaegar said X about Lyanna will not be revealing some big secret to characters and the readers seing as the belief is already there. My issue is there is no evidence to support what Barristan believes,what the singers believe,what Cersie or Kevan believes.

Then we have Ned your absolutely correct and i will ask can we deduce that the reason why Ned hasn't devulged anything about Lya's feelings for Rhaegar must be because there's nothing to devulge?Also,i think its unfair to look to Ned for any overt signs especially when being confronted with certain topic.He's evasive as expected it is those unspoken thoughts we are privy too that reveal quite a bit.

I'm still hazy on the 'tons' of evidence and i'm really not trying to be cheekish i'm trying to get the pointers so i know what it looks like.I'm sorry i'm very analytical and if i see the points then things like emotions ya da yada will fall into place ...if i have something that's tangible i can grasp.

So far i got Rhaegar crowning Lya at the tourney.I can look at that bit of info and weigh that out,see if there are other alternatives,is it what it seems etc

I got the 'abduction' same thing look at it,is it tight etc etc.

And that's what i got so far. I guess i'm asking for is what is the foundational points, what is it ,that when you saw it made you say Rhaegar is the dad?

What is the non-RLJ explanation for Rhaegar crowning Lyanna the Queen of Love and Beauty?

And why did GRRM write these opinions into the heads of his characters? Most of them seem to think Rhaegar loved Lyanna. I'm not saying they're right, but something had to give them that impression. The evidence, in this case, is the belief itself. I see 3 possibilities:

1.) Rhaegar and Lyanna were clearly, publicly in love.
2.) Rhaegar kidnapped Lyanna, and people assumed it was for love (why else? he didn't hold her hostage against Stark loyalty)
3.) None of the above happened, but instead someone paid good money to a few dozen singers to spread this false tale, and amazingly, all of them died without revealing they were part of a massive plot to deceive a continent.