146 replies to this topic

[westie420uk]

1st off i would like to apologize if this has already been discussed on the forum, i'm new to the site & i'm still getting to know my way around it & i couldn't find the answer through the search bar.
So my wuestion is would Joffrey be a Hill or a Waters?

I'm not sure if you get your bastard name from the area your parents come from or the area you are born in.Jamie & Cersei are from the the Westerlands, so that would make him a Hill, but he was born in the Crownlands so that would make him a Waters. Either way he is a little bastards!

Edited by westie420uk, 29 March 2012 - 09:14 AM.

[Bright Blue Eyes]

That would be Jaime's decision. You can name your bastard the way you want*, Hill, Waters etc. are just the standard.

*Unless he could get confused with an actual house.

[Fragile Bird]

I've said this before and I'll say it again, but technically none of the children are bastards because they are all born in a marriage.  When Ned changes Robert's will, he writes "true born heirs", he doesn't use the word "bastard" to disinherit anyone.  The children are not bastards.

[Mumatil]

Fragile Bird, on 28 March 2012 - 02:09 PM, said:

I've said this before and I'll say it again, but technically none of the children are bastards because they are all born in a marriage.  When Ned changes Robert's will, he writes "true born heirs", he doesn't use the word "bastard" to disinherit anyone.  The children are not bastards.

I thought the parents had to be married to each other for it to be legitimate.

[westie420uk]

Fragile Bird, on 28 March 2012 - 02:09 PM, said:

I've said this before and I'll say it again, but technically none of the children are bastards because they are all born in a marriage.  When Ned changes Robert's will, he writes "true born heirs", he doesn't use the word "bastard" to disinherit anyone.  The children are not bastards.

But Joffrey is not Roberts true born heir as he is not Roberts son & as Jamie & Cersei are not married that would make all 3 bastards, would it not?

[Euphail]

Mumatil, on 28 March 2012 - 02:28 PM, said:

I thought the parents had to be married to each other for it to be legitimate.

westie420uk, on 28 March 2012 - 02:35 PM, said:

But Joffrey is not Roberts true born heir as he is not Roberts son & as Jamie & Cersei are not married that would make all 3 bastards, would it not?

I agree as well, but I don't think this situation comes up very often (where it was the man who was cuckold) so it's difficult to find precedence - in situations where it did arise, I suspect the wife and children are not around for long.

[Fragile Bird]

No, heavens no.  Until the advances brought by DNA, how did a man ever know his children were his, unless they really looked different from both husband and wife?  That's why Cersei is safe.  In Westeros, hair and eye colour seem to follow different rules regarding what is recessive and what isn't.  There are whole threads on that topic, lol.

westie420uk, on 28 March 2012 - 02:35 PM, said:

But Joffrey is not Roberts true born heir as he is not Roberts son & as Jamie & Cersei are not married that would make all 3 bastards, would it not?

A bastard is a person born outside of marriage.  Some definitions say , a child born to a man and a woman who are not married to each other, but that definition is incomplete.  If the woman is married, the child can't be a bastard, the child is born in a marriage.  Period.  I'm not trying to be rude or silly, but for the most part we all take for granted that our mom and dads are our mom and dads, don't we?  How would we know otherwise, unless mom told us?

ETA:  the problem with Ned changing Robert's will to "true born heir" is, prove it.

Edited by Fragile Bird, 28 March 2012 - 02:44 PM.

[John Ball]

Waters must be the worst bastard name.

Sand, Snow, Storm, Rivers, cool names.

Hill is average.

But even Flowers is better than Waters.

Joffrey Waters. Gendry Waters. Nah.

[Euphail]

Fragile Bird, on 28 March 2012 - 02:41 PM, said:

No, heavens no.  Until the advances brought by DNA, how did a man ever know his children were his, unless they really looked different from both husband and wife?  That's why Cersei is safe.  In Westeros, hair and eye colour seem to follow different rules regarding what is recessive and what isn't.  There are whole threads on that topic, lol.



A bastard is a person born outside of marriage.  Some definitions say , a child born to a man and a woman who are not married to each other, but that definition is incomplete.  If the woman is married, the child can't be a bastard, the child is born in a marriage.  Period.  I'm not trying to be rude or silly, but for the most part we all take for granted that our mom and dads are our mom and dads, don't we?  How would we know otherwise, unless mom told us?

ETA:  the problem with Ned changing Robert's will to "true born heir" is, prove it.

I don't think it's reasonable that a child would be considered a standing heir to a man who is not his/her father. Nor do I think that father is lawfully a father to a child they didn't sire. I don't understand how a woman whom is unfaithful in the marriage and has a child, necessitates a responbility to the man.

I dont' see how they would be kin.


If the loophole is "prove it," well then I don't think it's a matter of if they are bastards, the reader has full information.

[Silver Spearwife]

Fragile Bird, on 28 March 2012 - 02:41 PM, said:

A bastard is a person born outside of marriage.  Some definitions say , a child born to a man and a woman who are not married to each other, but that definition is incomplete.  If the woman is married, the child can't be a bastard, the child is born in a marriage.  Period.  I'm not trying to be rude or silly, but for the most part we all take for granted that our mom and dads are our mom and dads, don't we?  How would we know otherwise, unless mom told us?

ETA:  the problem with Ned changing Robert's will to "true born heir" is, prove it.

The definition of a bastard is someone whose parents are not married to each other.

Question: By your own definition, why is it relevant if the mother or father is the married one? No one has ever disputed that Jon (assuming Ned is his father) or Gendry are bastards, and both of their fathers were married at the time. So Cersei is married. Jaime isn't. Why on earth does it matter that it's the mother who's the married one? It may make a difference in determining who the child belongs to, but it doesn't matter in inheritance laws, which is all that people in Westeros care about. In fact, they're a little obsessed with it going through the male line. Why would they throw it away by allowing the mother to sleep around as she pleases?

Robert has nothing to do with it. He's not Joffrey's father, end of story. I have no idea what your last line means, because no matter what, Joffrey has no claim through anything regarding Robert. Because he's not related to the guy. Blood is what matters in inheritance laws. Sure, they can be overridden, but that is done on a case-by-case basis, not as a rule.

People in ASoIaF have a preoccupation with their wives being maidens. One theory I heard was because men want to have added certainty that their child is their own.

Bastards in ASoIaF have no claims (unless legitimized). You are saying that if the woman is married, the child isn't a bastard. If he's not a bastard, does that make him a real Baratheon? Well, that can't be right, because he's not a Baratheon at all. So is he a real Lannister? Does he have claim to Casterly Rock? Why? Nothing in the story indicates that that would even be sort of true.

The wiki's down right now so I can't check, but another (weaker) wiki says that Edric Storm's mother is married. I assume she was married when Edric was conceived. Edric's a bastard, no one hides it, no one pulls any punches with it. He's a bastard. He has no claims. That is it. The same applies to Ramsay, though it was a lowborn marriage (was she technically widowed before or after he was conceived? I can't recall. It's pushing it close).

Your definition of a bastard is yours alone, to my knowledge. No one I have ever encountered - not anyone else on the site, not anyone in ASoIaF, and I can safely assume Martin himself - agrees with your definition.

Edited by Silver Spearwife, 28 March 2012 - 03:36 PM.

[Not A Lannister]

Fragile Bird, on 28 March 2012 - 02:41 PM, said:

No, heavens no.  Until the advances brought by DNA, how did a man ever know his children were his, unless they really looked different from both husband and wife?  That's why Cersei is safe.  In Westeros, hair and eye colour seem to follow different rules regarding what is recessive and what isn't.  There are whole threads on that topic, lol.



A bastard is a person born outside of marriage.  Some definitions say , a child born to a man and a woman who are not married to each other, but that definition is incomplete.  If the woman is married, the child can't be a bastard, the child is born in a marriage.  Period.  I'm not trying to be rude or silly, but for the most part we all take for granted that our mom and dads are our mom and dads, don't we?  How would we know otherwise, unless mom told us?

ETA:  the problem with Ned changing Robert's will to "true born heir" is, prove it.

Although that was the law in 18th Century England. I doubt very much it applies to Westerosi law regarding how you go about claiming a child is a bastard.

[Baitac]

Fragile Bird is correct. Children born within a marriage are presumed legitimate and of that marriage. Robert believed those children were his and Joff was to ascend to the throne as his son and heir. Even if children are born outside the marriage, they can be legitimized if they are legally recognized by both parents. Thus, children can acquire the last name of their legitimate father. One peculiarity of Westeros is that children, even if recognized, will often carry this geographical last name. However, at any point, a "bastard" can receive the family's last name a la Ramsay Snow.

[ShadowRaven]

Fragile Bird, on 28 March 2012 - 02:41 PM, said:

No, heavens no.  Until the advances brought by DNA, how did a man ever know his children were his, unless they really looked different from both husband and wife?  That's why Cersei is safe.  In Westeros, hair and eye colour seem to follow different rules regarding what is recessive and what isn't.  There are whole threads on that topic, lol.



A bastard is a person born outside of marriage.  Some definitions say , a child born to a man and a woman who are not married to each other, but that definition is incomplete.  If the woman is married, the child can't be a bastard, the child is born in a marriage.  Period.  I'm not trying to be rude or silly, but for the most part we all take for granted that our mom and dads are our mom and dads, don't we?  How would we know otherwise, unless mom told us?

ETA:  the problem with Ned changing Robert's will to "true born heir" is, prove it.

..........Ridiculous.

Bastard in Westeros = child born from outside of the marriage of the two in marriage.
Thus, Joffrey and co were born outside of the marriage of Robert and Cercei, making them bastards.

Done.

Edited by ShadowRaven, 28 March 2012 - 04:14 PM.

[Euphail]

Baitac, on 28 March 2012 - 04:07 PM, said:

Fragile Bird is correct. Children born within a marriage are presumed legitimate and of that marriage. Robert believed those children were his and Joff was to ascend to the throne as his son and heir. Even if children are born outside the marriage, they can be legitimized if they are legally recognized by both parents. Thus, children can acquire the last name of their legitimate father. One peculiarity of Westeros is that children, even if recognized, will often carry this geographical last name. However, at any point, a "bastard" can receive the family's last name a la Ramsay Snow.

Absolutely, presumed being the key term. It is presumed that Robert was the father, until people realize he's not.

[Spookrys]

Baitac, on 28 March 2012 - 04:07 PM, said:

Fragile Bird is correct.

No.

[Baitac]

Sorry if you don't like it, but that's how it is. The burden falls on those who want to disprove legitimacy. Two people are married to each other, kids are born while they are married to each other, they are considered to be legitimate and of that marriage. Now, we have DNA testing, but in Westeros, if Cersei and Jamie don't say anything, no amount of gossip or ill thinking will convert those kids to bastards.

[snowtarg]

@ShadowRaven, @SilverSpearwife

You are arguing for the common sense interpretation of the word "bastard."  The problem is that the law has its own definition of what constitutes illegitimacy.  Under common law a married woman's children are considered legitimate unless it can be proven that her husband is not their father.  In the case of Cersei's three children by Jaime, she has only admitted their true paternity to one man, Ned Stark.  He is no longer able to testify against her, so unless she admits to someone in authority that Robert was not her father's children, Joffrey, Myrcella and Tommen will be considered legitimate children of King Robert Baratheon.  The fact that the readers know that they are not Robert's children does not have any legal standing within the Seven Kingdoms.

FragileBird and Baitac are correct regarding the legal status of Cersei's children within the context of English common law, which is presumably quite similar to the laws of Westeros.

[Fragile Bird]

ShadowRaven, on 28 March 2012 - 04:13 PM, said:

..........Ridiculous.

Bastard in Westeros = child born from outside of the marriage of the two in marriage.
Thus, Joffrey and co were born outside of the marriage of Robert and Cercei, making them bastards.

Done.

Quote me the page in any book in the series that backs that up.

You are mixing up your feelings for the situation and the impact of being married.  Marriage is a legal status.  Children born in a marriage are children of the marriage.  Robert recognized Joffrey as his son (and the other 2 as his as well).  That's why so many women in North America in the 60s and 70s who said, "Oh, we're not getting married, it's just a piece of paper", discovered to their horror when their relationship broke up that the piece of paper was important.  It's why courts across various countries bent over backwards to try to be fair and twisted the law until finally legislation was changed in all kinds of jurisdictions.

Being married is a huge shield for Cersei.  The status of her children cannot be questioned easily.  If you have a baby and you're married, that baby is the baby of the husband and wife.

[Fragile Bird]

Snowtarg said it very well.

This is also why I have said the night Jaime fights Ser Ilyn in the Godswood near the windows of his room at Darry and tells Ser Ilyn about sleeping with Cersei in that very room on their return from Winterfell, while Robert was in the bed, drunk, may come back to haunt Jaime.  Presumably Pia and his squire were in the room and may have overheard the whole conversation, which might be of great interest to the High Septon or Lady Stoneheart.

[Euphail]

Baitac, on 28 March 2012 - 04:33 PM, said:

Sorry if you don't like it, but that's how it is. The burden falls on those who want to disprove legitimacy. Two people are married to each other, kids are born while they are married to each other, they are considered to be legitimate and of that marriage. Now, we have DNA testing, but in Westeros, if Cersei and Jamie don't say anything, no amount of gossip or ill thinking will convert those kids to bastards.

I think we're confusing two different arguments. I am, as well as others I suspect, arguing that knowing a woman has produced a son out of wedlock constitutes that their offspring will have no rights.

I take from your arguments: prove they actually cheated and that Joff is not actually Roberts kid. That's a valid point - that is the game of thrones. But as the reader is in full knowledge, we can say that Joff is a bastard, because he is. Or am I misunderstanding your argument?

edit: spelling

Edited by Euphail, 28 March 2012 - 04:52 PM.