Tag: Anon asks

Do you see any Rhaenyra//Daenerys parallel?

Daenerys and Rhaenyra? Eh.

I mean, I guess there are parallels in the vaguest of senses? They are both female claimants to a throne sat by a male relative. Both were named Princess of Dragonstone by a previous king. Both had a stillbirth where their child showed draconic malformation. Both are dragon-riders, Both were forced into marriage …. both married twice? But those parallels are not perfect. Rhaenyra was named Princess of Dragonstone by a sitting king with recognized authority and ability to name her as such; Dany was named by a pretender of an overthrown dynasty that no one recognized as king. Rhaenyra’s dead child was her sixth; Dany her first. Dany was sold and raped in her first marriage; Rhaenyra’s marriage was probably never consummated and both she and her husband carried out affairs throughout it. Dany’s stillbirth was the result of a magical interference; Rhaenyra’s was the result of plain old stress. Rhaenyra’s second marriage was on account of her own wants and desires; Dany’s was for peace for her people.

To tell you the truth, it’s the contrast between the two that stands out to me.  The thing that defines Dany the most is that she cares deeply about others that she puts their interests and safety above her own personal desires, whereas Rhaenyra cares mainly about herself even if it means trampling the common people in the process. It is rather striking that Dany does everything in her power to bring peace to Mereen, even sacrificing her personal happiness by marrying a man she does not want in hopes that this would stop the bloodshed in the streets and spare her people. Compare and contrast to Rhaenyra blatant rejection of peace as symbolized by Corlys Velaryon’s suggestions of war-ending efforts for the sake of her personal vengeance. It is very clear that ruling is mainly a responsibility and duty to the people in Dany’s eyes, but for Rhaenyra, it is very much about her rights and what she is owed, even if that means sacrificing her people for it.

The points of contrast only continue to pile up on close examination of both narratives. Dany cares about her brother despite his abusive behavior towards her
and tries to save him to the very end; Rhaenyra wanted her 10-year-old
brother “questioned sharply” in an effort to cover up her own affair.
Dany cares about children, from the ones savaged by the slavers to make a
point to her highborn hostages that she refuses to execute to poor
little Hazzea to Missandei; Rhaenyra started a manhunt for her nephew
and niece and was all too ready to scapegoat Addam Velaryon and Nettles.
Dany certainly commits or condones cruel acts like crucifying the
masters in
Mereen or torturing the wineseller’s daughters but even then, the basis
of her actions is a far cry from Rhaenyra’s, who had no qualms about
having an innocent man seized, executed and fed to her dragon for
opposing her attempted land grab of the Velaryon lands and who freely
made use of torturers in trying to locate Aegon II and his children. At
her most cruel, Dany’s thoughts still showed her remorse when she had to
confront the reality of her orders in the form of the slowly dying
masters, and her motives were not simply
about personal revenge, though it is an element. In contrast,
Rhaenyra doubled down on her cruelty to the very end, and her pursuit of
personal vengeance only contributed to prolonging the war.
To put it simply, Daenerys is a savior while Rhaenyra was a tyrant. Take from that what you will.

Would you recommend Fire and Blood overall, despite the presence of the misogynistic writing you described? Is it still worth a read and wouldn’t make me want to hurl too much is I guess what I’m asking.

That’s a tough question to pose to someone who is still battling her frustrations with the text. To put it bluntly, I’m not a fan of Fire and Blood. It has quickly earned its place as my least favorite in the series and I’m currently too stuck on what I didn’t like to be able to enjoy the book overall. But that’s only my own experience. I have plenty of people on my dash who managed to look past the bad to appreciate the good, and just because I haven’t
been able to do that so far does not mean you would necessarily have the
same reaction.

I guess it depends on your tolerance threshold and if you are able to not get too caught up in it. There is still a lot to like in Fire and Blood so it’s by no means a one note book. My recommendation would be to read it but go in with clear expectations and the understanding that the historical book form of Fire and Blood feels like it crystallizes the issues we’ve been criticizing over the years more than any other. It doesn’t have the advantage of that kind of writing being offset by female PoVs or being challenged in other parts of the narrative like the main novels so the misogynistic writing is more condensed and often just there, unchallenged and unnecessary in many cases. Unlike TWOIAF, Fire and Blood goes full into the personal lives of the characters which, unfortunately, translates to a great deal of sexualization in the text and random tangents that serve no purpose and are horrifying (cough*Coryanne Wylde*cough) which can be discouraging. I don’t want to sound like I’m harping on the problems in the book or make it sound like it’s all bad. But it’s got Problems with a capital P.

That said, there is a lot of terrific women in this book. We have great stories about Queen Alysanne, her women’s court and her companions. We have an abundance of formidable women during the Dance. We have figures like Princess Alyssa, Princess Rhaenys, Baela Targaryen, Aly Blackwood, and damn it, Barbra Bolton may have appeared for a total of 2 lines but I love her. There is plenty of historical background if you’re into that. I may be iffy on how Jaehaerys I seems to shift character on demand to the narrative’s requirements but I so love the trifecta he made with Septon Barth and Queen Alysanne and the look into his policies (though I dislike how most of his and Alysanne’s daughters were written). Their sons Aemon and Baelon kill me in the same way Baelor Breakspear does. Jacaerys Velaryon, Aegon III, Viserys II and Coryls Velaryon are among the figures that I unabashedly love and appreciate.
I found myself caring about characters that I did not expect to care about, and surprisingly, I enjoyed the Dance, probably because this book either introduced or fleshed out a lot of characters to care for, which was sorely lacking in The Rogue Prince and The Princess and The Queen.

Basically, Fire and Blood is by no means a bad book, but it can be incredibly frustrating in places. If you’d like more details on what to expect, I have a post discussing some of my issues with Martin’s writing of women in Fire and Blood that I’m hoping to put up sometime in the next two weeks (fingers crossed). Or you can always hit my up with any other questions you may have. Hope that helps!

How things would have been different if varys took young griff to doran?

Alas, that’s not a scenario I can see happening, for it flies in the face of Varys’ established character and motivations.

Varys gave a long weary sigh, the sigh of a man who carried all the
sadness of the world in a sack upon his shoulders. “The High Septon once
told me that as we sin, so do we suffer. If that’s true, Lord Eddard,
tell me … why is it always the innocents who suffer most, when you high
lords play your game of thrones?”

 

“Ser Kevan. Forgive me if you can. I bear you no ill will. This was not
done from malice. It was for the realm. For the children.”

[..]

“No.”
The eunuch’s voice seemed deeper. “He is here. Aegon has been
shaped for rule since before he could walk. He has been trained in arms,
as befits a knight to be, but that was not the end of his
education. He reads and writes, he speaks several tongues, he has
studied history and law and poetry. A septa has instructed him in the
mysteries of the Faith since he was old enough to understand them. He
has lived with fisherfolk, worked with his hands, swum in rivers and
mended nets and learned to wash his
own clothes at need. He can fish and cook and bind up a wound, he knows
what it is like to be hungry, to be hunted, to be afraid. Tommen has
been taught that kingship is his right. Aegon knows that kingship is his
duty, that a king must put his people first, and live and rule for
them.”
   

 

Varys’ ethos rests on the principle that the aristocracy tramples the innocent and the common people for its political gain out of a rooted privilege that makes the nobles think it’s their right to do so on account of their bloodlines. They don’t care about the common people or even see them. Varys wants to give Westeros a king who does, one who shared the experiences and struggles of the peasantry so as to be able to not only sympathize with them but actively rule for them. So he conducts a little social experiment with Young Aegon by raising him in a controlled environment that immerses him in the lives of the common people so that he could be made into a perfect king. Varys designed it so that Aegon could experience the hardships of the working class and the vulnerable smallfolk so that he knows firsthand what they go through and work to better their lives; so that he sees his kingship as as an act of service and a responsibility towards his subjects rather than a birthright. That doesn’t work if Aegon is delivered to the court of the Prince of Dorne. Varys is too invested in his political philosophy and his little lab project to do this.

Of course, there is also the little tidbit of how Aegon is not actually Elia’s son and thus has no blood relation to the Martells. Putting him in such close proximity to them, especially Oberyn, from the very start could compromise Varys’ plans. Elia’s brothers are the most likely to spot holes in the tale of Aegon’s survival (”Elia trusted who with her son now? She would never do that!) and recognize the discrepancies in his appearance that denote his real identity (if JonCon could see it, do you think Oberyn and Doran wouldn’t?). Aegon’s presence with his purported uncles threatens to unravel the entire plot and foil all of Varys’ careful planning.

I don’t know you but I am tired read people think if Cersei marry with Rhaegar, the things could be better because: Tywin, babies, her crush for him and others. Sorry, but believe in what she thinks it’s not a good opinion for believe in this ideia. We know how she is, and for what we know about Rhaegar, it’s better they never marry.

You’re preaching to the choir here. I’ve touched upon that scenario a few times in AU asks but long story short, I agree. I really don’t think we’re meant to take Kevan’s or Cersei’s assertion of how the rebellion would have been prevented or how Rhaegar wouldn’t have needed Lyanna if only he’d married Cersei at face value. For one, their assumption comes from a racist, ableist and supremacist perspective that we’re meant to question. The Lannister worldview is neither healthy nor correct. That’s kinda the whole point.

Looking at Cersei and Rhaegar’s character motivations, I don’t see this working out well for anyone. I find that nice straightforward scenario that Kevan and Cersei posited highly unlikely. As I’ve said before, I have my doubts that Rhaegar’s pursuit of Lyanna was in reaction to Elia’s inability to have a third child for the prophecy; rather I think that Rhaegar’s interest superseded that since he demonstrated a rather clear sign of his designs on Lyanna during the tourney at Harrenhal and before Elia gave birth to Aegon. Too, it’s hard to reconcile the idea that Rhaegar’s gesture during the tourney was somehow divorced from his later disappearance with Lyanna (which is what’s implied in the take on his decision being a result of Elia’s health preventing another pregnancy) to the timeline and the events of the plot. That Rhaegar either didn’t mean to or wasn’t aware that he was declaring a romantic interest in Lyanna in Harrenhal is disputed by Westerosi cultural mores and chivarlic code – and the plot just doesn’t flow right if he had no designs on Lyanna at Harrenhal but for some reason remembered her and was dead-set on having her specifically be the mother of his third child once he learned about Elia’s condition. That’s quite a stretch imo.

And if Rhaegar’s decision isn’t reliant on whether his wife could provide a third child (which definitely wouldn’t be a third in this scenario because Cersei was all of 15 during that tourney), it may be that he still crowns Lyanna at Harrenhal and elopes with her anyway. I can only imagine the flames of rage on Cersei’s face. Damn her crush and damn Rhaegar’s wounded eyes to all of the seven hells! Cersei has coveted power since her childhood and that is a public hit to her political worth in front of everyone that matters in Westeros.
This is grounds for murder, my friend, as the not-so-dearly departed Robert Baratheon would tell you.

Not only would she be furious with Rhaegar, not only would the rose-tainted glasses be shattered forever, her reaction to the real Rhaegar – the melancholic prophecy-minded individual fond of Summerhal and invested in arcane lore about dragons and saviors – would not be kind.

That leaves the rebellion as the one remaining thing that might change for the better as result of these changes. Or not. Maybe, maybe Tywin’s potential involvement in Aerys’ court in this AU could prevent Aerys from murdering the Starks et al in the first place but if Tywin isn’t a part of Aerys’ court (who the hell knows who Aerys is in this au if he signs off on a Cersei-Rhaegar marriage) or if he packs his household and his daughter and returns to Casterly Rock over the rather public insult to Cersei, the rebellion still happens. Then it’s a matter of whether Tywin would join the war or say fuck the Targaryens, or join the war and say fuck the Targaryens…. except of course any grandchildren of his if they exist. If Tywin fights for Aerys, we might see the political landscape turned on its head since the
Lannisters joining the war on the side of the royalists would probably
tip the scales towards the crown and that’s… not good for like, four
kingdoms. Heads, spikes, bye bye half the characters that actually make
up canon. Sorry Lyanna but you’re dying in childbirth and leaving
your child to Cersei Lannister of all people.

Somehow I don’t see Jon surviving his first year in the world. Now, if Tywin cuts a deal with the rebels to join them in exchange of installing a grandchild as king, you have a Lannister-ruled Westeros earlier (not a good outcome under any circumstances), it’s potentially Viserys and Dany who get murdered, and Ned squirrels Jon away in Winterfell. If Tywin sits pretty at Casterly Rock and lets the Targaryens drown which I can easily see happening, especially if Cersei is not yet married to Rhaegar, you get canon only with Elia safe and healthy with whoever she ends up marrying.

So… yeah. Things might be better for the Martells in this scenario but not so for anyone else really.

Why weren’t Rhaena, Daena, and Elaena betrothed before the maidenvault?

Only Rhaena and Elaena were not betrothed before their confinement in the maidenvault. Their elder sister Daena was married to her brother Baelor in 160 but he refused to consummate the marriage and had it annulled once he became king.

As to why Rhaena and Elaena were still unpromised, note that Baelor imprisoned his sisters in 161, when Rhaena was 14 and Elaena 11. It’s true that many highborn ladies and indeed princesses were betrothed or even married at those ages (sigh, GRRM) but that doesn’t mean it was in any way unusual for either Rhaena or little Elaena to still be unbetrothed at their age. Elaena was simply too young for her marriage to be of any urgency, whereas Rhaena was very pious and might have expressed an interest in joining the Faith even then (she did wear embroidered depictions of the Faith on her clothes so her interest wasn’t hard to discern anyway, and unlike poor Naerys, she likely had the opportunity to have her wishes respected even then). Furthermore, the political theater in King’s Landing might not have allowed for much space to consider the matters of marriage and betrothals at a time when the crown and its lords were entangled in the Conquest of Dorne in which their losses were astronomical. I really don’t think setting up betrothals was anywhere near the would-be Viserys II’s agenda under these circumstances, and Daeron I barely spent a year, give or take, in King’s Landing before he left again for Dorne to deal with the rebellion and got murdered.

(ETA: @goodqueenaly reminded me that evidently there were plans to betroth one of Daeron I’s sisters. Per TWOIAF, “the Young Dragon intended to wed a sister to the Sealord
of Braavos to seal an alliance with him, with the aim of removing the
pirates that were hindering trade with the newly conquered Dorne.” Those plans never did happen, of course, and Daeron I died soon after for them to make no matter.)

So I am confused. If Rhaenys was never a heir for the IT why was she called the Queen who Never Was and why wasn’t she married to Viserys then. They were close in age and sixteen plus years with no siblings. It is pretty obvious she might not ever have any.

She was never recognized as heiress. However..

As the firstborn child of the Prince of Dragonstone, many hailed [Rhaenys] as
next in line for the Iron Throne after her father. When Queen Alysanne
held her in her arms for the first time, she was heard to call the
little girl “our queen to be.”

Though Rhaenys was later passed over for her uncle Baelon, she still possessed a strong claim by First Men-Andal succession laws. The Targaryen succession was a right mess at this point in time, but the principle that a daughter inherits before an uncle had been employed in Wetseros for thousands of years and saw plenty of women succeed to their fathers and grandfather’s seats. In the strictest legal terms of popular inheritance laws, Rhaenys Targaryen was her father Aemon’s heir and should have followed him as Princess of Dragonstone and sat the throne after Jaehaerys. But Jaehaerys named Baelon his heir instead and the Great Council of 101 affirmed his decision. However, the issue of Rhaenys’ inheritance remained a famous point of contention that was not only pushed multiple times by various parties including Rhaenys herself and her Velaryon husband, but was the cause of the infamous Second Quarrel between the Concillator and Good Queen Alysanne. Everyone knew that Rhaenys might have been queen if typical Andal-First Man laws were observed, regardless of whether or not she was ever acknowledged as heir to the Iron Throne.

As for the matter of marriage, note that Rhaenys’ match to Coryls Velaryon appears to have been by her own will. It is reported that Rhaenys “told [Jaehaerys] of her plans to marry, and received the king’s blessing.” It might not be the neat consolidation of Targaryen power that a match with Viserys would have been, or a decisive settling of the matter of succession, but things didn’t appear too dire with Aemon hale and healthy and Rhaenys expected to have a son soon. Indeed, Gyladyn says that while “the succession appeared solid as stone” in the Conciliator’s early reign, the stone only began to crack in 92 AC when Prince Aemon was slain on Tarth. Though Jaehaerys subsequently named Baelon as heir to the Iron Throne, Aemon’s comment to Rhaenys before his departure for Tarth about liking a grandson and Rhaenys’ own objection to the Jaehaerys’ decision being “You would rob my son of his birthright” suggests that it was Rhaenys’ son who was expected to be Aemon’s immediate successor. This is further supported by how Laena Velaryon’s birth is described by Gyldayn.

“The boy in the belly,” the unborn child who had been the subject of so
much debate, proved to be a girl when born in 93 AC. Her mother named
her Laena.

Though Rhaenys’ claim (and even Laena’s) would be raised again, it’s clear that the claim of Rhaenys’ possible son (who Rhaenys was carrying when Jaehaerys named Baelon Prince of Dragonstone, and who turned out to be Laena) was the main source of discussion at the time. That’s why it was mainly Laenor Velaryon’s claim that was considered by the Great Council of 101 (though the claims of his mother Rhaenys and sister Laena were also examined, they weren’t given much credence); with Aemon being Jaehaerys’ first heir and Baelon his second, it was the claims of their heirs that the lords had to decide between. For Aemon, it was his grandson Laenor who was clearly framed as his successor.

Had Duncan done his duty and not set a horrible example for his siblings, do the other betrothals get broken?

Maybe, maybe not. It was noted by Yandel that the then-prince Jaehaerys “did not fail to take note” that Aegon V and his court eventually yielded to older brother Duncan’s wishes so Duncan’s example was a solid example of how it was possible to defy the king’s marital designs and force him to accept a marriage he did not approve. That’s a nice backing to rely on that probably encouraged Jaehaerys and Shaera to elope. It might be that they wouldn’t be as assured of their plans if Duncan did not have his way, or wouldn’t think of openly defying their royal father like they did.

However,
Jaehaerys and Shaera had loved each other since they were
children, and they were noted to be as stubborn as their parents so it’s likely that they wouldn’t be discouraged just because of Duncan. Keep in mind that Jaehaerys would feel a lot less pressure to fulfill his betrothal if Duncan
acquiesced to his father’s wishes to set Jenny of Oldstones aside, since Duncan would remain Prince of Dragonstone instead of the title falling to Jaehaerys.
The elopement might still be a gross insult to the Tullys and the Tyrells, and counter-intuitive to Aegon’s politics and social norms, but it’s a bit less inflaming for the Tullys if they are not missing out on a crown for their daughter and future Tully-blooded kings. That this might make it easier for Jaehaerys and Shaera to act on their desires. After all, Aerys I stands as an example of how a royal prince got away with undermining a planned alliance largely because he was a second son so they might find inspiration there.

hi sam, love your blog xx why do you think ned didnt ask robert to legitimise jon snow – ik it probably has something to do with r+l=j but is there another reason? also couldn’t ned have told catelyn and jon about jon’s real parents and saved all 3 of them a lot of grief? how do you think that would have changed ned and jon’s relationship thank u in advance xxx

Greetings anon and thank you!

why do you think ned didnt ask robert to legitimise jon snow – ik it
probably has something to do with r+l=j but is there another reason?

This is a nonstarter for multiple reasons.
For one, Jon’s bastardy affords him a great deal of protection since
etiquette prevents questions about his parentage to emerge because it is
considered rude to pry into the origin of natural children.
It’s normal for men to father bastards in Westeros so no one blinks at
Ned claiming that he did; in fact it’s treated as a piece of juicy
gossip.

But if he
was to attempt to legitimize Jon, he’d invite scrutiny onto Jon and himself since
many would rightly wonder why he being so unorthodox with his bastard
son. It would definitely draw Robert’s attention to Jon which is
something Ned actively wanted to avoid. He really didn’t need Robert or
Jon Arryn looking too close at Jon’s origins.

On a personal note, such at attempt would annihilate Ned’s
relationship with Catelyn.
Legitimizing Jon hurts Cat on a deep personal level because she loves
Ned and was already haunted by the thought that he loved another so
deeply that he defied social norms for her child. Ned also loves Catelyn
and the inherent callousness towards her in the act of legitimizing Jon
would not only trash the loving relationship they had, but would
probably reverberate through the entire family as his children with her
were caught between their love for their brother and father, and their
love for their mother.

This irrevocably messes the family dynamic and would come at the cost of
several familial relationships.

As far as the politics of this goes, it should be noted that acts of legitimization are rare enough in Westeros
and when they do happen, it’s almost always in cases where there is no
direct heir to a house and succession is unclear. It is almost unheard
of for a lord to legitimize a bastard child when he has living
legitimate children and the one case where that happened with Aegon IV’s
decree to naturalize all his bastard children led to the Blackfyre
rebellions and generations of war. Which makes for an extremely
disconcerting example that bred a sociopolitical disinclination to
legitimize bastards, especially in the presence of trueborn
siblings. It is one thing to demand that Catelyn put up with Jon’s
presence in Winterfell but it’s another thing entirely to make such a
public statement about how much Ned favors him (to the possible
detriment of his other children) and elevate him to where he could
easily endanger Catelyn’s own children. Cat was already concerned about
Jon’s prospective danger and had the Blackfyres in mind, it certainly
would not help if Jon drew such a direct parallel to Daemon Blackfyre
through his legitimization and if she has to contend with legitimate
questions about what kind of message this might send to Ned’s bannermen
or whether this was a prelude to Jon supplanting Robb. One only needs to
look to Cat’s reaction to Robb’s decision to legitimize Jon for an idea
of how badly she’d react to such a move from Ned. Those were concerns
she lived with for years, since she came to the North as a
not-sure-footed outsider with her Riverrrun-born, Tully-looking son only
to find a Stark-looking baby already installed in Winterfell.

couldn’t ned have told catelyn and jon about jon’s real parents and
saved all 3 of them a lot of grief?

It is not that simple, alas. This is a very dangerous secret that Ned has to be very careful with. As he reflects…

Some secrets are safer kept hidden. Some secrets are too dangerous to share, even with those you love and trust.

He is not wrong here. I’ve always
thought that Jon deserved to know the truth, especially before he could
be allowed to sign his life away to the Night’s Watch, but I can see
where Ned is coming from. The more people know about this, the more
danger to Jon is and the more Ned risks exposure. Also, this is
information that directly puts anyone privy to it in danger too. It’s safer for everyone to keep this secret to himself.

Of
course, we can’t talk about the possibility of telling anyone without
taking Ned’s mental and emotional state into account. Revealing the
truth means that Ned would have to work through a lot of psychological
issues at a much faster pace that he was shown to be capable of,
in a society that has no grasp on things like trauma or how to help
someone work through it. More relevant, perhaps, is the question of how
that reveal might or might not change the state of affairs in Winterfell
since revealing Jon’s parentage is often accredited with being a
relatively easy fix to what issues arose from Jon’s presence there.
Personally, I think that telling Catelyn the truth is a monumentally bad
idea. It would certainly go a long way in alleviating Jon’s
internalized shame that was born out of Ned’s refusal to identify or
even talk about his mother, and in easing Catelyn’s hurt over Ned’s
supposed infidelity, but this reveal has plenty of political
ramifications that makes it almost impossible for Ned to tell Catelyn
the truth. Keep in mind that Catelyn’s main problem with Jon wasn’t
about her hurt feelings but rather about the political threat he posed
to her children. The truth doesn’t mitigate the danger Jon could pose to
Cat’s children, it makes it exponentially worse. Ned was committing treason
by harboring Jon fully knowing that Robert’s anger would be murderous
if he found out. Telling Catelyn the truth places her in a terrible
position where she is either made complicit in Ned’s treason and forced
to keep a secret she never signed up for (while perpetuating a threat to
her own children), or she has to sacrifice both Ned and Jon to save her
own children.

By telling Catelyn the truth, Ned would have placed
both her and Jon in danger. Cat by involving her in Ned’s lie, and Jon
by expanding the circle of those who know his identity and by making it
that his life could be the price of keeping Robb, Sansa, Arya, Bran and
Rickon safe. Indeed, Ned explicitly expresses his concern over what
Catelyn’s choice would be if it came down to Jon’s life against her own
children’s.

Ned thought, If it came to that, the life of some child I did
not know, against Robb and Sansa and Arya and Bran and Rickon, what
would I do? Even more so, what would Catelyn do, if it were Jon’s life, against the children of her body? He did not know. He prayed he never would.

Pulling back a little from the worst case
scenario, it remains certain to my mind that Catelyn would not react
well to the truth about Jon’s paternity. I can see her urging Ned to
keep the truth from Jon lest he get any ideas about launching a campaign
for the Iron Throne or any such crazy ruinous idea. I definitely think
she’d actively want Jon to join the Night’s Watch to neutralize his
prospective danger and she’d still want him away from Robb so that her
son wouldn’t get dragged into any potential conflict involving Jon.

how do you think that would have
changed ned and jon’s relationship

If Ned tells
Jon the truth? Depends on when he tells him I guess. Problem is that this
is not a piece of information that I can see Ned entrusting to a child.
It’s too precious and too dangerous so I don’t think that Ned would
gamble with Jon’s life by telling him too soon when a misplaced word at
the wrong time or in front of the wrong person could expose the truth.
That means that Jon would still internalize the idea that Ned was
ashamed of his mother or that he abandoned her, or that she
abandoned Jon. The truth also does not change the prejudice Jon faces as
a bastard and would increasingly bring some horrific realizations for
him. I think it’s a given that the truth would bring Jon a lot of pain
and sorrow for how it distances him from the identity he spent his
entire life dreaming of, and for how it “replaces” the father he loves
and respects with, well, Rhaegar Targaryen.
I don’t think he’d react well to the fact that Ned lied to him for so
many years, but at least the truth would come from Ned himself instead
of a third party like what will happen in canon. It’s a lot better
for Jon to hear this from Ned and to have him there to try to mitigate
the shock and the ramifications of that reveal. That could be really
substantial. Ned has acted as Jon’s father his entire life and
something as simple as reaffirming that, no matter his biological paternity, Ned is Jon’s father and the Starklings are
his siblings would go a long way in making the truth easier for Jon.
That’s extremely valuable for Jon’s emotional state.

And since telling the truth means that Ned had somewhat worked through
his trauma enough to tell Jon, it’s possible that he’d be willing to
share some information about Lyanna which would ease Jon’s deep wounds over not knowing anything about
his mother.

Would Lyanna/Edmure have been in the cards if Robert died during the betrothal and Stannis didn’t take up the position? There is a large but not impossible age difference & the Riverlands are close to the North. It would also push the actually wedding back a few years.

Nope. Brandon and Catelyn’s betrothal cements the Winterfell-Riverrun alliance and it’s not good politics to waste Lyanna or Edmure’s hands on an already established alliance when they can be used to ally with other houses. Why marry Lyanna to Edmure if you can marry her to, say, Elbert Arryn? Both Rickard Stark and Hoster Tully are too savvy and ambitious to squander a valuable marriage pawn each on an already guaranteed alliance.