Jump to content

If R + L Were Married, How Were They Married And Who Married Them?


Recommended Posts

Got it. I have many responses to these thoughts--but I think you are right that we have had this debate before and I have likely made most of these points to you in prior post, so I won't bother to lay out all of my evidence again. I will just leave any other readers who come along this post and are curious about these issues with the following thought--do we think Jon is The Prince that was Promised--A Son(g) of Ice (Lyanna) and Fire (Rhaegar), personified? If we do (and I certainly do), then he must be the Prince that was Promised and not the Bastard that was Promised.

Well I personally think that Jon, Daenerys, and a third person (Tyrion?) are all three aspects (heads) of the "prince that was promised." So already I think something fishy is going on there translation or prophecy wise. I don't think it's literally one prince (or princess) who will show up and defend humanity against the Others. As I said before I really don't see how their marriage in the eyes of the Faith would affect the ancient prophecy. Bloodlines and stuff may be important, but in the end a marriage is just words, and being a bastard is just a social hierarchy thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I personally think that Jon, Daenerys, and a third person (Tyrion?) are all three aspects (heads) of the "prince that was promised." So already I think something fishy is going on there translation or prophecy wise. I don't think it's literally one prince (or princess) who will show up and defend humanity against the Others. As I said before I really don't see how their marriage in the eyes of the Faith would affect the ancient prophecy. Bloodlines and stuff may be important, but in the end a marriage is just words, and being a bastard is just a social hierarchy thing.

And that's why I think we need to take the personalities of the people involved into account (namely, Rhaegar and Lyanna and also Ned). If you leave out Robert's incredibly biased account of this, Rhaegar was a noble, kind, honorable prince. When Ned compares him to Robert, he comes down on Rhaegar's side (the brothel scene where Ned is more or less disgusted by Robert's whoring and siring of bastards). Lyanna had the wolf-blood but she also had a bit of romanticism to her and thinks badly of Robert for fathering bastards in the Vale. So would Ned think highly of a man who dishonored his sister? Would Rhaegar take a mistress when it's thought that he wouldn't even visit whores? Would Lyanna agree to be a mistress?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I personally think that Jon, Daenerys, and a third person (Tyrion?) are all three aspects (heads) of the "prince that was promised." So already I think something fishy is going on there translation or prophecy wise. I don't think it's literally one prince (or princess) who will show up and defend humanity against the Others. As I said before I really don't see how their marriage in the eyes of the Faith would affect the ancient prophecy. Bloodlines and stuff may be important, but in the end a marriage is just words, and being a bastard is just a social hierarchy thing.

As I was drafting a post in the pinned R+L=J thread, a thought occurred to me (which I noted in that thread) which I would like to expand on here. Here is my train of thought. It seems highly likely that Lyanna went willingly with Rhaegar. The likely motive is to get out of the marriage to Robert. But she has to return eventually. So if she intended the relationship to remain platonic at that point in time, she accomplishes nothing because when she returns, the wedding will be back on. If she knew she was going to have a romantic (i.e., sexual) relationship with Rhaegar that does not involve marriage, then what is her endgame? Come back and tell Robert that she is now the mistress of the Crown Prince and thus cannot marry him? That does not make sense either. That would be completely humiliating for Lyanna.

What would entice Lyanna to go with Rhaegar? What would get Lyanna out of her current predicament of being engaged to Robert that would potentially put her in a better situation? The only answer that makes any sense to me is that Rhaegar convinced Lyanna to run away and marry him. She gets out of her marriage to Robert and comes back as the wife of the crown prince (yes, risk of challenge to polygamous marriage, but R likely convinces L that Targs are not limited that way (Aegon I/Maegor), and L is of the Old Gods where polygamy is allowed). R gets the mother of the third head and once he make the ice/fire connection, realizes she will give him TPTWP.

This explanation answers all of the "unanswered" questions we have about what R/L were doing when they took off together. The alternatives leave big logical holes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And that's why I think we need to take the personalities of the people involved into account (namely, Rhaegar and Lyanna and also Ned). If you leave out Robert's incredibly biased account of this, Rhaegar was a noble, kind, honorable prince. When Ned compares him to Robert, he comes down on Rhaegar's side (the brothel scene where Ned is more or less disgusted by Robert's whoring and siring of bastards). Lyanna had the wolf-blood but she also had a bit of romanticism to her and thinks badly of Robert for fathering bastards in the Vale. So would Ned think highly of a man who dishonored his sister? Would Rhaegar take a mistress when it's thought that he wouldn't even visit whores? Would Lyanna agree to be a mistress?

Yeah, I see your point. I don't know that we know enough about Rhaegar or Lyanna to answer those questions. Obviously I don't buy into Robert's portrait of Rhaegar as an evil rapist, but somehow I doubt he was the perfect fairy tale prince either.

Also isn't it possible that taking a second wife is more dishonorable/taboo than having a mistress or fathering a bastard? Likely even, given how many people we know kept mistresses and fathered bastards?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I was drafting a post in the pinned R+L=J thread, a thought occurred to me (which I noted in that thread) which I would like to expand on here. Here is my train of thought. It seems highly likely that Lyanna went willingly with Rhaegar. The likely motive is to get out of the marriage to Robert. But she has to return eventually. So if she intended the relationship to remain platonic at that point in time, she accomplishes nothing because when she returns, the wedding will be back on. If she knew she was going to have a romantic (i.e., sexual) relationship with Rhaegar that does not involve marriage, then what is her endgame? Come back and tell Robert that she is now the mistress of the Crown Prince and thus cannot marry him? That does not make sense either. That would be completely humiliating for Lyanna.

What would entice Lyanna to go with Rhaegar? What would get Lyanna out of her current predicament of being engaged to Robert that would potentially put her in a better situation? The only answer that makes any sense to me is that Rhaegar convinced Lyanna to run away and marry him. She gets out of her marriage to Robert and comes back as the wife of the crown prince (yes, risk of challenge to polygamous marriage, but R likely convinces L that Targs are not limited that way (Aegon I/Maegor), and L is of the Old Gods where polygamy is allowed). R gets the mother of the third head and once he make the ice/fire connection, realizes she will give him TPTWP.

This explanation answers all of the "unanswered" questions we have about what R/L were doing when they took off together. The alternatives leave big logical holes.

That is an interesting take on it, and very possible! Maybe she thought Robert wouldn't want her after Rhaegar had her first?

and L is of the Old Gods where polygamy is allowed)

This I have to take issue with. We don't know of any polygamous Starks or other northerners apart from two wildlings who aren't subject to the laws and societal pressures of Westeros.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, I see your point. I don't know that we know enough about Rhaegar or Lyanna to answer those questions. Obviously I don't buy into Robert's portrait of Rhaegar as an evil rapist, but somehow I doubt he was the perfect fairy tale prince either.

Oh certainly not a perfect fairy tale prince. Rhaegar was obsessive and myopic and he did think he was the savior of the world, so there's arrogance there as well, though I do think that the burden he thought he carried weighed heavily on him (all those trips to Summerhall). But yes, I agree. He's not Prince Charming.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is an interesting take on it, and very possible! Maybe she thought Robert wouldn't want her after Rhaegar had her first?

This I have to take issue with. We don't know of any polygamous Starks or other northerners apart from two wildlings who aren't subject to the laws and societal pressures of Westeros.

As to your first point--I address that in my post. It would be completely humiliating to get out of a marriage simply by having sex with another man first. Lyanna is a noble woman. She would not get out a marriage that way. In addition, if she wanted to do that, she would not have to disappear to get out that way--just have sex with Rhaegar and let people know about it.

The point is that under the Old Gods there don't seem to be any religious rules about these things one way or the other. Societal rules--yes. For societal reasons, no one has a second wife. But no one suggests that Crastor or Oldfather were not actually married to these additional women. Whatever problems people have with Crastor, it is not polygamy, per se. The point is that in Westeros is seems pretty clear that if you perform whatever you need to perform to have a marriage (which a horse cannot be a participant of so that example is silly--the horse cannot say the necessary words or whatever), then you are married. Might there be consequences if you upset the head of your house--sure. But consequences is not the same thing as not having a valid marriage. And that is why I think they stayed away until the baby was born. Having a baby makes it much more difficult to try to annul the marriage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like where unmasked lurker is going with this. To add to it - Lyanna's father had "southern ambitions" which we are never really told what that truly means.



If Lyanna became a future Queen (by marrying Rheagar) would that now help satisfy her dad's southern ambitions? Lord Rickard could now break off the engagement with Robert Baratheon and save some face and not be as mad at her. She actually married up instead of looking like a whore and a mistress.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also didn't a Septon have some rubies that he claimed he found at the Trident? How do we know whether this is a lie and that this may have been payment for marrying (and keeping quiet) about Rheagar and Lyanna? I keep thinking it was Septon Meribald, but I can't remember.



Maybe rubies signify Rheagar? Don't know, probably grasping.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

As to your first point--I address that in my post. It would be completely humiliating to get out of a marriage simply by having sex with another man first. Lyanna is a noble woman. She would not get out a marriage that way. In addition, if she wanted to do that, she would not have to disappear to get out that way--just have sex with Rhaegar and let people know about it.

The point is that under the Old Gods there don't seem to be any religious rules about these things one way or the other. Societal rules--yes. For societal reasons, no one has a second wife. But no one suggests that Crastor or Oldfather were not actually married to these additional women. Whatever problems people have with Crastor, it is not polygamy, per se. The point is that in Westeros is seems pretty clear that if you perform whatever you need to perform to have a marriage (which a horse cannot be a participant of so that example is silly--the horse cannot say the necessary words or whatever), then you are married. Might there be consequences if you upset the head of your house--sure. But consequences is not the same thing as not having a valid marriage. And that is why I think they stayed away until the baby was born. Having a baby makes it much more difficult to try to annul the marriage.

I guess we disagree, I think that if a marriage is somehow not valid then you're not really married. What makes you think it's clear that once you go through the ceremony it's done and cannot be declared invalid? We know that vows made at swordpoint are invalid, isn't it also possible that vows said that conflict with a previous vow might be considered invalid? (I'm sure saying invalid a lot.)

Since you don't like my horse example what about a gay marriage? We don't see any of those presumably because it's not allowed. If two men ran off and got married in front of a tree do you think that would be seen as a valid marriage?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that Jon is legitimate. I believe that R and L were married. I believe that Rhaegar remained married to Elia.

Grrm has established that polygyny was practiced by the Targs in the past. Nothing established that it is forbidden to Targs in the present.

Was it legal? I think the legality might not be that big of a deal. I think that grrm has answered this with Catlyns thought:

"the Targaryens answered to neither gods nor men."

Martin, George R.R. (2011-03-22). A Game of Thrones 4-Book Bundle: A Song of Ice and Fire Series: A Game of Thrones, A Clash of Kings, A Storm of Swords, and A Feast for Crows (Song of Ice & Fire) (Kindle Location 21549). Random House Publishing Group. Kindle Edition.

I think that the R + L marriage was a combination of love and prophecy.

However, I don't think that Rhaegar was willing to give up his crown "for the women he loved". In rl there are usually rules that have to be followed for a crown prince to get married. If Westeros has any such rules I believe that Rhaegar would have followed them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agree with Lonin. We need to look at it from the standpoint of a long running, ruling family as the Targaryens. They didn't follow the rules - they made the rules. Power corrupts - eventually if your in power you are bound to change things to your benefit. To hell what other Houses think.



Rheagar hints to Jaime that things were going to change after he came back from the Trident. Maybe he was taking of removing Aerys or maybe he meant his own personal life.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's clear that in some instances they are forced to listen to men. Like the example I mentioned before of Duncan the Small being disinherited for marrying a commoner. The SSM I posted earlier strongly suggests that they could not get away with polygamy without dragons:



http://www.westeros....amy_in_Westeros



Quote



[Would polygamous marriages be accepted in Westeros today, especially if Targaryens were involved?]



If you have some huge fire-breathing dragons, you can get people to accept a lot of things that they might otherwise have problems with.





Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess we disagree, I think that if a marriage is somehow not valid then you're not really married. What makes you think it's clear that once you go through the ceremony it's done and cannot be declared invalid? We know that vows made at swordpoint are invalid, isn't it also possible that vows said that conflict with a previous vow might be considered invalid? (I'm sure saying invalid a lot.)

Since you don't like my horse example what about a gay marriage? We don't see any of those presumably because it's not allowed. If two men ran off and got married in front of a tree do you think that would be seen as a valid marriage?

Isn't the validity in the eye of the biased beholder, though? If the High Setpon is angry that R and L married without his say so, it doesn't change that they did get married by a wandering septon. The High Septon saying, "your marriage is not valid because I said so" does not make it so. If all the elements of a traditional southron marriage where there (witnesses, marriage cloak, septon, vows) then it's a marriage.

It's clear that in some instances they are forced to listen to men. Like the example I mentioned before of Duncan the Small being disinherited for marrying a commoner. The SSM I posted earlier strongly suggests that they could not get away with polygamy without dragons:

http://www.westeros....amy_in_Westeros

Quote

I think it strongly suggests that non traditional marriage is easier if you have dragons, not that non traditional marriage is impossible without dragons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also didn't a Septon have some rubies that he claimed he found at the Trident? How do we know whether this is a lie and that this may have been payment for marrying (and keeping quiet) about Rheagar and Lyanna? I keep thinking it was Septon Meribald, but I can't remember.

Maybe rubies signify Rheagar? Don't know, probably grasping.

You're not. There is a pretty big theory about those rubies: http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/topic/88235-what-is-the-rhaegar-ruby-theory/?p=4479978 <--that post explains the Rhaegar's rubies theory.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's clear that in some instances they are forced to listen to men. Like the example I mentioned before of Duncan the Small being disinherited for marrying a commoner.

Was Duncan the small disinherited by men? or by his father, the Targaryen King for breaking a Targaryen rule for a crown prince's marriage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Isn't the validity in the eye of the biased beholder, though? If the High Setpon is angry that R and L married without his say so, it doesn't change that they did get married by a wandering septon. The High Septon saying, "your marriage is not valid because I said so" does not make it so. If all the elements of a traditional southron marriage where there (witnesses, marriage cloak, septon, vows) then it's a marriage.

That's sort of a philosophical question I guess, what exactly is marriage. I don't think the High Septon has to explicitly declare any polygamous marriages invalid, I think they just are because the vows you are taking conflict with your previous marriage vows.

Was Duncan the small disinherited by men? or by his father, the Targaryen King for breaking a Targaryen rule for a crown prince's marriage.

Well we're told that Aegon married for love and allowed his sons to do the same, so I don't think he would have disinherited his own first born unless there was external pressure on him to do so. Also the other sons defied his wishes also and were not disinherited.

The Prince of Dragonflies loved Jenny of Oldstones so much he cast aside a crown, and Westeros paid the bride price in corpses. All three of the sons of the fifth Aegon had wed for love, in defiance of their father’s wishes. And because that unlikely monarch had himself followed his heart when he chose his queen, he allowed his sons to have their way, making bitter enemies where he might have had fast friends.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's sort of a philosophical question I guess, what exactly is marriage. I don't think the High Septon has to explicitly declare any polygamous marriages invalid, I think they just are because the vows you are taking conflict with your previous marriage vows.

Do the marriage vows--in either Old or New Way--explicitly say you shall not have any other wives? Craster and Ygon Oldfather both practice polygamy, but no one thinks those marriages are invalid. Craster is thought ill of because he practices incest; but with Ygon it is simply stated that he has 18 wives but no judgement is made.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...