J. Stargaryen Posted October 31, 2016 Share Posted October 31, 2016 Just now, Ygrain said: Apologies for not reading the full theories - did anyone mention that Aegon VII would be a holy number, connected to waiting for the seventh ruby? I did back in that first post, yeah. Quote If Jon's true name is Aegon, there is a fair chance he could turn out to be the seventh King Aegon, following fAegon as Aegon VI in a short stint, or as a pretender. Which, btw, could provide a possible spin on the Elder Brother's famous quote: “Six have been found. We are all waiting for the seventh.” GRRM has already introduced the idea of rival Aegons in TPatQ and TRP. Aegon the Elder ruled first briefly as Aegon II (even numbered=bad Aegons), and was succeeded by the Younger as Aegon III (odd numbered=good Aegons). Foreshadowing for Aegons VI and VII? Interestingly, Aegon III was known for always dressing in black. Link Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Varys Posted October 31, 2016 Share Posted October 31, 2016 8 hours ago, J. Stargaryen said: So what you're saying is that, aside from the arguments we made, there isn't much of an argument. That's like saying, aside from the pants you're wearing, you're not wearing any pants. I just don't felt I had to address those pants in detail because they didn't seem to fit very well. 8 hours ago, J. Stargaryen said: Fair enough. It's true that we don't seem to have evidence that Lyanna cared about, and/or agreed, with Rhaegar's prophetic beliefs. However, given the time they spent together it seems very likely, at least imo, that she would have learned about them. Especially if she was pregnant with Rhaegar's third head/child. That's a fair assumption, right? If we can agree upon those things, then all it would take is something to convince Lyanna that the prophecy stuff was true, or might be true. Or, there is another option, which I will address below.* I don't see any reason to see Lyanna as Rhaegar's agent, sharing his opinions and believing into the same stuff he did. I postpone such decision until we have clarity about her own political and prophetic views. Lyanna being able to know about Rhaegar's prophetic believes isn't the same as her actually sharing those beliefs. Elia Martell knew Rhaegar's prophetic beliefs at least partially but that doesn't mean she shared them or condoned any of his actions. 8 hours ago, J. Stargaryen said: ETA: As below, you seem to be making contradicting arguments about how babies are named. You say that the fathers traditionally do the naming, but then claim here it's Lyanna's choice. Not to mention it's a bit of a stretch to make such an argument. It's not Aegon I's fault that Aerys II was bonkers. No, there is no contradiction here. I'm aware that Lyanna would have made the final call on the name if there was a name considering Rhaegar was either already dead or not there when the child was born. The fact that fathers usually name their children was to support the idea that Rhaegar might already have chosen a name for his unborn child when he left Lyanna. After all, there was a chance that he would die and battle and it is reasonable to assume the child was very much on his mind when he left. That doesn't mean Lyanna must have cared about the name he had chosen, of course, but if we go with a Targaryen name for the child it is much more likely that Rhaegar choose it and Lyanna stuck with it rather than that Lyanna chose a specific Targaryen name all on her own just because of prophetic ideas she was fed by Rhaegar. I think if it was her call - or if she felt it was her call - that she would have chosen a different name entirely. As a name, Aegon would be very much connected with the Targaryen dynasty. While we have reason to believe that Lyanna loved Rhaegar (although I'm not holding my breath that she was very happy with him when he left her alone with those knights rather than to take her with him) there is no reason to believe that she liked his family and what it stood for at this point. As a name, Aegon stands for the Targaryen dynasty in a much stronger sense than Aemon (or any other Targaryen name) would. Granted, Aerys would be even a greater no-go in her mind. My take is that Lyanna either stood by the choice Rhaegar made before he left her or she chose a name of her own - and in the second scenario there simply is no good reason to believe she would have picked a Targaryen name aside from, perhaps, Rhaegar's own. Holocaust survivors also tend to give their children the names of dead relatives. It seems reasonable to assume that Lyanna would do a similar thing. 8 hours ago, J. Stargaryen said: Honestly, I don't understand how you can argue here that Lyanna would've picked a Northern name, but then just below it argue that the father traditionally picked the names. That is my idea if we assume Lyanna had leeway to choose a name because Rhaegar never brought the subject up. If they never thought about a name before the birth the fact that the boy pretty much looked like a Stark would make a Stark name much more fitting and likely than a Targaryen name. 8 hours ago, J. Stargaryen said: by your own logic, it makes perfect sense that Lyanna would have named her baby Aegon. Because Rhaegar, the father, had chosen the name Aegon for his son and heir, who was to be the PtwP. So, in a roundabout way, Rhaegar would have chosen the name for Lyanna's baby, who was Rhaegar's son and heir. No, that doesn't make much sense. Name-recycling is uncommon in House Targaryen. Aerys II didn't give all the sons that died in the cradle the same name. There weren't a bunch of dead Aegons until one lived. There was an Aegon, a Daeron, a Jaehaerys, and finally the Viserys who lived. Jaehaerys I and Alysanne had thirteen children and five of them died as infants/children yet none of their names were used again. Jaehaerys' firstborn child was a boy, Prince Aegon, but after his death no other child of his was named Aegon. One could even assume that it was improper to curse a child with the name of a dead sibling in Westeros. That makes it very unlikely that Lyanna would have given her son the same name as Rhaegar's other son had had. The cases of the two boys are also remarkably different. Rhaegar named his son by Elia with the strong conviction that he himself would be king one day and that his eldest son would be king after him. That's why he named him Aegon. A name fit for a king for the boy who is going to be king one day. The idea that Lyanna considered her son Rhaegar's legal heir and a future king by the time of his birth is rather unlikely considering the political circumstances she found herself in. We don't even know anything about the claims of posthumously born children in Westeros. Would the throne remain empty in peaceful times until it was known whether the child the Queen Dowager (or Princess Dowager of Dragonstone) was carrying was male or female? Or would the king's heir presumptive just take the throne and be done with it? We don't know. But in Rhaegar's case events were overtaking Lyanna and her (unborn) child. Robert was king now, and Viserys III was taking what was left of the Targaryen estates. Nothing was left for Rhaegar's child by Lyanna. 8 hours ago, J. Stargaryen said: One idea I had back when I came up with this idea, was that Rhaegar believed that his son and heir, named Aegon, was to be the PtwP. And those things were true. They just weren't true about his son with Elia. And maybe Lyanna realized that when she had a son. It's just speculation, but it seems to me the kind of thing GRRM might do. The way in which he might toy with prophecy. Sure. Nor is it farfetched that he may have told Lyanna how his son and heir, named Aegon, was to be the PtwP. But there is no hint that Rhaegar named his eldest son Aegon because of the promised prince thing. The boy was the promised prince in his mind as well as second in line to the Iron Throne (while Rhaegar lived) and thus likely to be king one day. Aegon was a name for a king in Rhaegar's mind, not the proper name for the promised prince. And we have no reason to believe that Lyanna thought her son should or would be king. There is no reason to believe that the promised prince should have a traditional Targaryen name. Rhaegar was named Rhaegar when his parents, grandfather, and great-granduncle believed he was the promised prince yet for all we know Rhaegar isn't a special Targaryen name. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J. Stargaryen Posted October 31, 2016 Share Posted October 31, 2016 2 hours ago, Lord Varys said: I just don't felt I had to address those pants in detail because they didn't seem to fit very well. Regardless, what you said didn't make much sense logically speaking. Quote I don't see any reason to see Lyanna as Rhaegar's agent, sharing his opinions and believing into the same stuff he did. I postpone such decision until we have clarity about her own political and prophetic views. His agent? Why word it that way? How about his wife or lover? The mother of his child. All of those things imply a partnership. Okay, then let's not speculate about anything until TWoW comes out? Quote Lyanna being able to know about Rhaegar's prophetic believes isn't the same as her actually sharing those beliefs. Elia Martell knew Rhaegar's prophetic beliefs at least partially but that doesn't mean she shared them or condoned any of his actions. Nor did I claim it was. Only that it was possible. IF she came to believe the same things Rhaegar did, then she would have motive to name the boy Aegon. Something that would otherwise seem extremely unlikely. Quote No, there is no contradiction here. I'm aware that Lyanna would have made the final call on the name if there was a name considering Rhaegar was either already dead or not there when the child was born. The fact that fathers usually name their children was to support the idea that Rhaegar might already have chosen a name for his unborn child when he left Lyanna. After all, there was a chance that he would die and battle and it is reasonable to assume the child was very much on his mind when he left. Your arguments here are all over the place, actually: i) father's traditionally name the babies; ii) Lyanna wouldn't have chosen the name Aegon because of what Aerys II did to her family; iii) if Jon has a Targaryen name it would have been one Rhaegar had chosen; iv) unless she chose the Targaryen name, in which case it's more likely to have been Rhaegar; v) but she probably would have chosen a Stark name over a Targaryen name anyway, so never mind. So maybe contradiction wasn't the right word. Instead I should have said that you were just throwing a bunch of stuff against the wall to see if any of it stuck. Quote That doesn't mean Lyanna must have cared about the name he had chosen, of course, but if we go with a Targaryen name for the child it is much more likely that Rhaegar choose it and Lyanna stuck with it rather than that Lyanna chose a specific Targaryen name all on her own just because of prophetic ideas she was fed by Rhaegar. I think if it was her call - or if she felt it was her call - that she would have chosen a different name entirely. This is all just textually unsupported speculation. Don't you see the difference between the quality of that, and the scenario @Rippounet and Ihave presented, which takes into account (possible) character motivations based on events that transpired in the text? Because I find those more convincing than off-the-cuff speculations and dismissals. Quote As a name, Aegon would be very much connected with the Targaryen dynasty. While we have reason to believe that Lyanna loved Rhaegar (although I'm not holding my breath that she was very happy with him when he left her alone with those knights rather than to take her with him) there is no reason to believe that she liked his family and what it stood for at this point. As a name, Aegon stands for the Targaryen dynasty in a much stronger sense than Aemon (or any other Targaryen name) would. Granted, Aerys would be even a greater no-go in her mind. Agreed. And naming him Aegon Targaryen could have been a way for Lyanna to declare who he was, and what belonged to him. Namely the IT and the 7K. Now, maybe she wanted to avoid exactly that, but maybe she didn't. I don't know. Quote My take is that Lyanna either stood by the choice Rhaegar made before he left her or she chose a name of her own - and in the second scenario there simply is no good reason to believe she would have picked a Targaryen name aside from, perhaps, Rhaegar's own. Holocaust survivors also tend to give their children the names of dead relatives. It seems reasonable to assume that Lyanna would do a similar thing. Sorry, but this argument seems poorly thought out to me. If R&L married, then Jon's house name is Targaryen. That right there is reason enough to give him a Targaryen name, be it Aegon, Aemon or something else entirely. Hell, you could make a slightly weaker case that the same is true even if Jon is Rhaegar's bastard. Targaryen blood is, or at least would be, reason enough to give Jon a Targaryen name. Quote That is my idea if we assume Lyanna had leeway to choose a name because Rhaegar never brought the subject up. If they never thought about a name before the birth the fact that the boy pretty much looked like a Stark would make a Stark name much more fitting and likely than a Targaryen name. We're told that Ned gave Jon the name. If Lyanna gave him a Stark name, why the hell would Ned call him Jon? If Jon has a secret true name, which has seemed very likely to lots of the fandom for a very long time, it's bloody effing obvious that it's a recognizably Targaryen name. Quote No, that doesn't make much sense. Name-recycling is uncommon in House Targaryen. Aerys II didn't give all the sons that died in the cradle the same name. There weren't a bunch of dead Aegons until one lived. There was an Aegon, a Daeron, a Jaehaerys, and finally the Viserys who lived. Jaehaerys I and Alysanne had thirteen children and five of them died as infants/children yet none of their names were used again. Jaehaerys' firstborn child was a boy, Prince Aegon, but after his death no other child of his was named Aegon. One could even assume that it was improper to curse a child with the name of a dead sibling in Westeros. That makes it very unlikely that Lyanna would have given her son the same name as Rhaegar's other son had had. None of these situations is remotely like RLJ. For starters, in all of those cases both parents were alive for the naming. Plus, and more importantly, there's the whole special issue of the PtwP prophecy, which is a key part of the reasoning behind the scenario Ripp and I laid out, that you're conveniently ignoring. This isn't even apples to oranges. Quote The cases of the two boys are also remarkably different. Rhaegar named his son by Elia with the strong conviction that he himself would be king one day and that his eldest son would be king after him. That's why he named him Aegon. A name fit for a king for the boy who is going to be king one day. The idea that Lyanna considered her son Rhaegar's legal heir and a future king by the time of his birth is rather unlikely considering the political circumstances she found herself in. And we also see in that vision that Rhaegar believes his son, named Aegon, is thought to be the PtwP. Quote We don't even know anything about the claims of posthumously born children in Westeros. Would the throne remain empty in peaceful times until it was known whether the child the Queen Dowager (or Princess Dowager of Dragonstone) was carrying was male or female? Or would the king's heir presumptive just take the throne and be done with it? We don't know. Agreed. But I think we can agree that it's certainly possible, one way or another, that Jon could end up as a king, if not the king. So, what Lyanna believed may not be as important as the inherent symbolism. Sometimes it's hard to figure out which we're supposed to take away from the scene, or is it both? Quote But in Rhaegar's case events were overtaking Lyanna and her (unborn) child. Robert was king now, and Viserys III was taking what was left of the Targaryen estates. Nothing was left for Rhaegar's child by Lyanna. In reality, that's probably true. But all that would be necessary is that Lyanna came to believe in (possibility of) the prophecy stuff that Rhaegar told her. Quote But there is no hint that Rhaegar named his eldest son Aegon because of the promised prince thing. The boy was the promised prince in his mind as well as second in line to the Iron Throne (while Rhaegar lived) and thus likely to be king one day. Aegon was a name for a king in Rhaegar's mind, not the proper name for the promised prince. How would you know? As I recall it, the idea that I proposed was this. Rhaegar learned, or came to believe, that his son, named Aegon, was destined to be the PtwP. So when his first son was born he named him Aegon. Rhaegar passed this information along to Lyanna during their time together. When she learned that Elia's son had been murdered, and gave birth to a son of her own, she would have realized that the prophecy Rhaegar had told her about could still come true, if she named her baby boy Aegon. As I said up thread, I could see this fitting with the way GRRM has characters misreading prophecy. Quote And we have no reason to believe that Lyanna thought her son should or would be king. There is no reason to believe that the promised prince should have a traditional Targaryen name. Rhaegar was named Rhaegar when his parents, grandfather, and great-granduncle believed he was the promised prince yet for all we know Rhaegar isn't a special Targaryen name. Sure there is. For starters, he was supposed to come from the line of Aerys and Rhaella. Unless they knew exactly which baby was supposed to be the PtwP before it was born, how would they know to give it anything other than a (traditional) Targaryen name? Unless I'm misremembering, nobody thought Rhaegar was the PtwP until after he was born. Coming from the line of A+R ≠ A+R's first born. --- As I said up thread, I still view Aemon as the most likely choice. So I'm not trying to convince anyone that Aegon is the correct answer. however, I do think it's possible, and I think the reasoning supporting that conclusion is fairly solid. At least in my estimation, it's a lot less crackpot than what often passes for theories on these forums. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rippounet Posted October 31, 2016 Share Posted October 31, 2016 Nice discussion folks. All right, as I was saying earlier, from a strict logical perspective, we should consider: 1) The names Rhaegar and Lyanna would have considered together (which include all the names Rhaegar would choose). and 2) The names Lyanna would choose on her own after Rhaegar's death (including, possibly, the name Rhaegar itself). For the purpose of this discussion, it's best to assume that we are looking for a Targaryan name. Alternatives would be possible of course (including original names), but we are looking for a name which serves a thematic purpose so we'll go for Targaryan names. As for 1) it's clear Aemon is a good contender. I'd overlooked it earlier because I'd forgotten about Aemon the Dragonknight... But for 2), I think Aegon is a very strong possibility, for the reasons @J. Stargaryen and I have outlined. But once you go past pure logic and focus on the thematic angle, both have a lot for them... 1) Aemon. There's all the excellent quotes and points raised by @Shmedricko . Of course there's the special relationship it reinforces with Maester Aemon. I think also we can say that generally speaking Aemon is a name that can be linked to honor and selflessness, if not outright sacrifice. Aemon the Dragonknight put his honor before his love and eventually sacrificed himself for Aegon IV. Maester Aemon refused the throne and even became a maester to protect the realm from a possible civil war. It's a name that would suit a prophecised savior. Interestingly enough, Aemon the Dragonknight and Aegon IV were rivals for Naerys, and Jon and (F)Aegon could be rivals for Daenerys. 2) Aegon. It's the name that is associated with Targaryans and the Targaryan Dynasty throughout the books. As has been repeated, Jon would be the seventh of his name. Rhaegar wanted TPtwP to bear this name, and Jon, like his ancestor the Conqueror, would likely have a dragon. Also, Aegon unified the seven kingdoms and Jon (with Dany) would likely have to do that all over again after the second Long Night. Like with Aemon, it's possible to find some quotes that could have a double-entendre... Quote Khal Drogo has never lost a fight. He is Aegon the Dragonlord come again, and you will be his queen. AGoT, Dany I Her son had won two great victories, smashing Jaime Lannister in the Whispering Wood and routing his leaderless host outside the walls of Riverrun in the Battle of the Camps, but from the way some of his bannermen spoke of him, he might have been Aegon the Conqueror reborn. ACoK, Cat I The vision in tHotU: Quote She nodded. "There was a woman in a bed with a babe at her breast. My brother said the babe was the prince that was promised and told her to name him Aegon." "Prince Aegon was Rhaegar's heir by Elia of Dorne," Ser Jorah said. "But if he was this prince that was promised, the promise was broken along with his skull when the Lannisters dashed his head against a wall." I'd never noticed it before, but the way Dany says it implies that Rhaegar did want TPtwP to be named Aegon, not the other way around (thinking that his son Aegon may be TPtwP). And of course, there's these thoughts by Dany: Quote Five Aegons had ruled the Seven Kingdoms of Westeros. There would have been a sixth, but the Usurper's dogs had murdered her brother's son when he was still a babe at the breast. If he had lived, I might have married him. Aegon would have been closer to my age than Viserys. ADwD, Dany I And finally, Maester Aemon's own words... Quote "Allow me to give my lord one last piece of counsel," the old man had said, "the same counsel that I once gave my brother when we parted for the last time. He was three-and-thirty when the Great Council chose him to mount the Iron Throne. A man grown with sons of his own, yet in some ways still a boy. Egg had an innocence to him, a sweetness we all loved. Kill the boy within you, I told him the day I took ship for the Wall. It takes a man to rule. An Aegon, not an Egg. Kill the boy and let the man be born." The old man felt Jon's face. "You are half the age that Egg was, and your own burden is a crueler one, I fear. You will have little joy of your command, but I think you have the strength in you to do the things that must be done. Kill the boy, Jon Snow. Winter is almost upon us. Kill the boy and let the man be born." ADwD, Jon II I would argue that in this passage there's more of a parallel between Jon and Aegon (the fifth) than between Jon and Aemon. So that's for a fairly balanced analysis. I'll add two points that are slightly more debatable. i) There is actually nothing that allows us to say Rhaegar did choose a male name for "Jon." Dany chooses a male name for her son with Khal Drogo because she's convinced it will be a son. It has to be, according to prophecy (she wants "a stallion"). Neither Khal Drogo nor she ever consider a female name. With Rhaegar and Lyanna, the situation is reversed. Rhaegar has every reason to expect a daughter, whose name would -logically- be Visenya. And this is assuming they did choose a name before the birth in the first place. How often does this happen in the books? Rhaegar himself obivously waited for his child with Elia to be born to name him. Why would he do it differently with his child with Lyanna? ii) There may be more to Jon's education than meets the eye. At a glance, we all take for granted that Jon is both trained at arms and educated. He can fight and he can read, and we know from the books that he knows about history and geography as well (he knows about houses and sigils, that much is certain). We can safely assume that he has received roughly the same education as Robb, who was supposed to become lord of House Stark. But why? Yes, it was safer for Ned to bring him in the North to protect him. But as Cat herself points out, Jon didn't have to be raised in Winterfell like Ned's own sons. For Cat, Jon is a bastard from a common woman. For us, Jon is the son of Rhaegar Targaryan. For Ned to give Jon the education of a highborn boy is not just likely to raise suspicions... It's actually tantamount to treason, because of the potential threat it poses to Robert's dynasty if Jon ever finds out about his parentage and decides to act on it. Consider that A Dance with Dragons ends with Varys's words: Quote "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." We know Varys to be speaking about (F)Aegon. But much of what he says could be said of Jon as well. In fact, Vary's words are often seen as reflecting the political philosophy that Martin has imbued his work with: ruling is a duty not a right, power is a responsibility not a privilege. However, depending on what Lyanna made Ned promise, those words may fit Jon far more than we often assume. I don't think it's crazy to wonder whether Jon was raised by Ned for a higher purpose. I would expect Jon's true name to be linked to that purpose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MtnLion Posted October 31, 2016 Share Posted October 31, 2016 For the reasoning that @J. Stargaryen and @Shmedricko layout, I have always believed that GRRM was leading us to the reveal of Jon as Aemon Targaryen. The parallel between Maester Aemon and Jon has been pretty obvious to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Varys Posted October 31, 2016 Share Posted October 31, 2016 8 hours ago, J. Stargaryen said: His agent? Why word it that way? How about his wife or lover? The mother of his child. All of those things imply a partnership. I chose that word deliberately to emphasize that I don't like the idea that the default character/motivation of a wife or widow is to continue the work of her late husband in all things. Especially not in esoteric matters. Usually people see most of the secondary and tertiary female characters in such roles. That is a problematic view, in my opinion, especially considering that there are wives like Cersei Lannister, Lysa Tully, Olenna Redwyne, who don't care all that much about the goals and motivations of their husbands. Lyanna Stark is introduced as a very determined and willful character. I take that into account when thinking about her and a part of that is not assume that she hold an opinion just because Rhaegar might have done so. 8 hours ago, J. Stargaryen said: Nor did I claim it was. Only that it was possible. IF she came to believe the same things Rhaegar did, then she would have motive to name the boy Aegon. Something that would otherwise seem extremely unlikely. Why would you want to believe Lyanna would come to believe the same things Rhaegar believed? Is it likely that she had the time to study arcane prophecy or even the opportunity to read the same prophecies Rhaegar read? That's not very likely. Most educated people in Westeros don't take people like Rhaegar - who believe in arcane prophecies for no good reason - very seriously. 8 hours ago, J. Stargaryen said: Your arguments here are all over the place, actually: i) father's traditionally name the babies; ii) Lyanna wouldn't have chosen the name Aegon because of what Aerys II did to her family; iii) if Jon has a Targaryen name it would have been one Rhaegar had chosen; iv) unless she chose the Targaryen name, in which case it's more likely to have been Rhaegar; v) but she probably would have chosen a Stark name over a Targaryen name anyway, so never mind. It is just that I consider any of the scenarios I gave above more likely than the one you gave. And the point of all that was the Rhaegar idea - that was why I commented on the whole thing. 8 hours ago, J. Stargaryen said: This is all just textually unsupported speculation. Don't you see the difference between the quality of that, and the scenario @Rippounet and Ihave presented, which takes into account (possible) character motivations based on events that transpired in the text? Because I find those more convincing than off-the-cuff speculations and dismissals. We have reason to believe that Lyanna Stark - as well as Eddard and Benjen Stark - were affected by the way Aerys II treated their family. We have no reason to believe Lyanna Stark cared about any prophecies Rhaegar Targaryen may have believed in. Do we know what's happened? No. I just find the prophecy idea less likely than some other possible scenarios. More unlikely would be the idea that Jon's name is actually Aerys Targaryen - although one could also concoct a scenario in which Rhaegar would want name the boy after his own father or Aerys I, the man who likely (re-)discovered the promised prince prophecy. 8 hours ago, J. Stargaryen said: Agreed. And naming him Aegon Targaryen could have been a way for Lyanna to declare who he was, and what belonged to him. Namely the IT and the 7K. Now, maybe she wanted to avoid exactly that, but maybe she didn't. I don't know. Sorry, but this argument seems poorly thought out to me. If R&L married, then Jon's house name is Targaryen. That right there is reason enough to give him a Targaryen name, be it Aegon, Aemon or something else entirely. Hell, you could make a slightly weaker case that the same is true even if Jon is Rhaegar's bastard. Targaryen blood is, or at least would be, reason enough to give Jon a Targaryen name. There are Targaryens like Duncan the Small and Joffrey Velaryon who didn't get a traditional Valyrian name. That aside, even if Lyanna and Rhaegar were married (which I think they were) this was effectively a non-issue when the boy was born. The Targaryens were done, and Lyanna's son wouldn't profit from bearing a Targaryen name at all. Why take that road in such a scenario? In addition, Lyanna Stark most definitely wasn't a public or recognized Targaryen consort. The idea that she would identify as a member of her husband's family is not very likely, and we see how widows shape their children in their image rather than the images of their late husbands. That's a power that comes if you are a Lady or Queen Dowager. 8 hours ago, J. Stargaryen said: We're told that Ned gave Jon the name. If Lyanna gave him a Stark name, why the hell would Ned call him Jon? If Jon has a secret true name, which has seemed very likely to lots of the fandom for a very long time, it's bloody effing obvious that it's a recognizably Targaryen name. That is true - which is why I think Lyanna gave Jon whatever name Rhaegar (and perhaps both of them) had chosen earlier on. 8 hours ago, J. Stargaryen said: None of these situations is remotely like RLJ. For starters, in all of those cases both parents were alive for the naming. Plus, and more importantly, there's the whole special issue of the PtwP prophecy, which is a key part of the reasoning behind the scenario Ripp and I laid out, that you're conveniently ignoring. This isn't even apples to oranges. No, you are making a big fuzz about the promised prophecy when the name Aegon isn't even connected to that. Again, it is a royal name not the prophesied name of the promised prince. 8 hours ago, J. Stargaryen said: And we also see in that vision that Rhaegar believes his son, named Aegon, is thought to be the PtwP. Agreed. But I think we can agree that it's certainly possible, one way or another, that Jon could end up as a king, if not the king. So, what Lyanna believed may not be as important as the inherent symbolism. Sometimes it's hard to figure out which we're supposed to take away from the scene, or is it both? I don't interpret the story with the ending in mind. As long as we don't know whether Jon Snow will ever be king or not it is moot to use the possibility that he might be king as an argument that he should be a kingly name. In general I prefer an approach that treats the characters as 'living people' rather than favoring symbolism. But those are just my preferences. 8 hours ago, J. Stargaryen said: In reality, that's probably true. But all that would be necessary is that Lyanna came to believe in (possibility of) the prophecy stuff that Rhaegar told her. How can you think a woman dying in childbirth in the middle of nowhere abandoned by everyone but three knights would believe in her late husband's mad ramblings about prophecy? Honestly, how realistically is it that Lyanna Stark died believing any of the stuff Rhaegar might have told her after the Trident and the Sack? That just doesn't make any sense. 8 hours ago, J. Stargaryen said: How would you know? Well, we know that Rhaegar says Aegon is the name of a king. He doesn't say anything about the name of the promised prince. There is no special name prophesied for the promised prince as far as we know. Presupposing that this is the case without any textual evidence is question-begging. 8 hours ago, J. Stargaryen said: Sure there is. For starters, he was supposed to come from the line of Aerys and Rhaella. Unless they knew exactly which baby was supposed to be the PtwP before it was born, how would they know to give it anything other than a (traditional) Targaryen name? Unless I'm misremembering, nobody thought Rhaegar was the PtwP until after he was born. Coming from the line of A+R ≠ A+R's first born. The Ghost made her prophecy before Summerhall, causing the marriage of Aerys and Rhaella. It is not far-fetched that those believing in that prophecy (Jaehaerys II) put high hopes in the child Rhaella was going to give birth to at Summerhall. You are right that they wouldn't have believed it prior to the birth but they believed it thereafter, and Jaehaerys II could have believed it immediately thereafter considering that it shouldn't have been that difficult to come up with the whole 'smoke from the fire, salt from the tears for the dead' interpretation. I doubt that people needed years to figure that out. If Rhaegar's name was only chosen after the birth they might very well have chosen the obscure Targaryen name Rhaegar for a boy they believed/hoped/suspected to be the promised prince. 8 hours ago, J. Stargaryen said: As I said up thread, I still view Aemon as the most likely choice. So I'm not trying to convince anyone that Aegon is the correct answer. however, I do think it's possible, and I think the reasoning supporting that conclusion is fairly solid. At least in my estimation, it's a lot less crackpot than what often passes for theories on these forums. It is not very crackpottery, I agree there. However, I personally would find the idea of Jon being another Rhaegar more interesting. Hell, that could also fit nicely with him eventually riding the dragon Rhaegal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J. Stargaryen Posted November 7, 2016 Share Posted November 7, 2016 On 10/31/2016 at 5:01 PM, Lord Varys said: I chose that word deliberately to emphasize that I don't like the idea that the default character/motivation of a wife or widow is to continue the work of her late husband in all things. Especially not in esoteric matters. Usually people see most of the secondary and tertiary female characters in such roles. That is a problematic view, in my opinion, especially considering that there are wives like Cersei Lannister, Lysa Tully, Olenna Redwyne, who don't care all that much about the goals and motivations of their husbands. Lyanna Stark is introduced as a very determined and willful character. I take that into account when thinking about her and a part of that is not assume that she hold an opinion just because Rhaegar might have done so. I feel like you're accusing me of taking away Lyanna's agency, or something along those lines, when what's been suggested really does the opposite. The theory means that Lyanna would have succeeded, where Rhaegar twice failed in correctly identifying the PtwP. Quote Why would you want to believe Lyanna would come to believe the same things Rhaegar believed? Is it likely that she had the time to study arcane prophecy or even the opportunity to read the same prophecies Rhaegar read? That's not very likely. Most educated people in Westeros don't take people like Rhaegar - who believe in arcane prophecies for no good reason - very seriously. It's pretty easy to come up with reasons, actually. She had spent time with him, and was having his baby. It's unnecessary for Lyanna to have studied the prophecies the way Rhaegar did, as he could have given her a crash course. Quote It is just that I consider any of the scenarios I gave above more likely than the one you gave. And the point of all that was the Rhaegar idea - that was why I commented on the whole thing. You're entitled to that opinion, of course. However, I think it's important to recognize, and acknowledge, the difference in quality between the actual theory and the counters you're offering. @Rippounet and I both put some thought into the idea, as evidenced by the way it unfolds, I think. Things happen for a reason, in a certain order. Character motivations are mixed with story and plot elements, etc. Whereas it seems to me that you're kind of pulling ideas off the top of your head, and saying they're possible because you think they are. Quote We have reason to believe that Lyanna Stark - as well as Eddard and Benjen Stark - were affected by the way Aerys II treated their family. We have no reason to believe Lyanna Stark cared about any prophecies Rhaegar Targaryen may have believed in. I disagree. She was having his baby. And Rhaegar seemed to believe he needed three children to fulfill the prophecy. Btw, if by "no reason to believe" you mean that we don't have any direct evidence, that's true, but I'd point out that we're probably not going to get into the details of RLJ until after it is revealed. It might be counterproductive to do it the other way around. Quote There are Targaryens like Duncan the Small and Joffrey Velaryon who didn't get a traditional Valyrian name. That aside, even if Lyanna and Rhaegar were married (which I think they were) this was effectively a non-issue when the boy was born. The Targaryens were done, and Lyanna's son wouldn't profit from bearing a Targaryen name at all. Why take that road in such a scenario? Yeah, but this particular Targaryen boy is meant to be important. So I think he'll have an important name. Again, I think Aemon is the most likely, but I think Aegon would also make a lot of sense. At least to me, those are the only two candidates. I feel fairly confident that Jon Snow has a secret true name. And the only reason to keep it a secret is because it would reveal his parentage. Which a Targaryen name would do, but a Stark name would not. So I think it's obvious that this secret true name is a Traditional Targaryen name. So, I'm sure Lyanna had her reasons for giving him that name. Which GRRM will reveal after RLJ. Technically speaking, I guess it's possible, like in a one-in-a-million kinda way, that his true name is Brandon Targaryen. But I don't think that makes sense, since there's no reason for Ned to call him Jon Snow instead of Brandon Snow in that case. Quote In addition, Lyanna Stark most definitely wasn't a public or recognized Targaryen consort. The idea that she would identify as a member of her husband's family is not very likely, and we see how widows shape their children in their image rather than the images of their late husbands. That's a power that comes if you are a Lady or Queen Dowager. I guess it's worth pointing out that, despite possibly being a Targaryen prince, Jon was raised by his mother's family. Quote That is true - which is why I think Lyanna gave Jon whatever name Rhaegar (and perhaps both of them) had chosen earlier on. Yes, this is certainly possible. Quote No, you are making a big fuzz about the promised prophecy when the name Aegon isn't even connected to that. Again, it is a royal name not the prophesied name of the promised prince. Rhaegar chose the name Aegon for the child he believed to be the PtwP, which means Rhaegar thought the PtwP should be named Aegon. Seems pretty connected to me. The fact that he chose the Targaryen name doesn't negate that. Of course he did. Was he supposed to name him Azor Targaryen, or maybe Ernie? Quote I don't interpret the story with the ending in mind. As long as we don't know whether Jon Snow will ever be king or not it is moot to use the possibility that he might be king as an argument that he should be a kingly name. In general I prefer an approach that treats the characters as 'living people' rather than favoring symbolism. But those are just my preferences. You're entitled to your preferences, but they don't dictate the terms of the discussion. So when you make the "moot" argument we're just going to have to agree to disagree. Quote How can you think a woman dying in childbirth in the middle of nowhere abandoned by everyone but three knights would believe in her late husband's mad ramblings about prophecy? Honestly, how realistically is it that Lyanna Stark died believing any of the stuff Rhaegar might have told her after the Trident and the Sack? That just doesn't make any sense. Maybe not the way you spin it. But I think your position is unnecessarily extreme. I've never felt like it made much sense to characterize Rhaegar's belief in prophecy as a negative. With the Others coming, Westeros is in need of a hero or three. So tell me, exactly how mad were Rhaegar's ramblings about prophecy? Quote Well, we know that Rhaegar says Aegon is the name of a king. He doesn't say anything about the name of the promised prince. There is no special name prophesied for the promised prince as far as we know. Presupposing that this is the case without any textual evidence is question-begging. Again, Rhaegar names the child he believes to be the PtwP, Aegon. That is a textual connection between the name Aegon and the PtwP. So I'm not presupposing a connection. Quote The Ghost made her prophecy before Summerhall, causing the marriage of Aerys and Rhaella. It is not far-fetched that those believing in that prophecy (Jaehaerys II) put high hopes in the child Rhaella was going to give birth to at Summerhall. Yes, it's possible. Quote You are right that they wouldn't have believed it prior to the birth but they believed it thereafter, and Jaehaerys II could have believed it immediately thereafter considering that it shouldn't have been that difficult to come up with the whole 'smoke from the fire, salt from the tears for the dead' interpretation. I doubt that people needed years to figure that out. If Rhaegar's name was only chosen after the birth they might very well have chosen the obscure Targaryen name Rhaegar for a boy they believed/hoped/suspected to be the promised prince. Again, yes, this is possible. But it's just speculation for now. I have to say, I'm kind of surprised how easily you are able to speculate about some things, but then have difficulty imaging why Lyanna would have given Jon a Targaryen name, or how she could have come to believe in the PtwP prophecy. Quote It is not very crackpottery, I agree there. However, I personally would find the idea of Jon being another Rhaegar more interesting. Hell, that could also fit nicely with him eventually riding the dragon Rhaegal. In that case, I'm glad I didn't present an idea you did find overly crackpot. Btw, apologies for the delayed response. I haven't had as much time for the forum lately. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Varys Posted November 7, 2016 Share Posted November 7, 2016 1 hour ago, J. Stargaryen said: I feel like you're accusing me of taking away Lyanna's agency, or something along those lines, when what's been suggested really does the opposite. The theory means that Lyanna would have succeeded, where Rhaegar twice failed in correctly identifying the PtwP. Well, that's pretty easy to answer. Searching for (or rather: creating) the promised prince was Rhaegar's obsession. It was his mission, his agenda, his goal. Not Lyanna's. If Lyanna succeeded where Rhaegar failed then Lyanna had no agency of her own but just succeeded (or finished) where Rhaegar failed. She didn't do anything because she wanted to but she continued what Rhaegar wanted to do or even what he told her to do. If you see Lyanna that way she just becomes some sort of Rhaegar-appendix insofar as her motivation is concerned, and I very much doubt that George created a character like Lyanna to act in this way. 1 hour ago, J. Stargaryen said: It's pretty easy to come up with reasons, actually. She had spent time with him, and was having his baby. It's unnecessary for Lyanna to have studied the prophecies the way Rhaegar did, as he could have given her a crash course. That kind of talk is what I mean. Lyanna just becomes Rhaegar's prophecy-apprentice, his devoted follower in creating the savior of the world. That's not completely impossible, of course, but we have no reason whatsoever to believe that anything of that happened. This thing is also supposed to be a love story of some sort, and love usually has more levels than the 'we have to fulfill some ancient prophecy' angle. On Lyanna's part prophecy would have had nothing to do with the whole affair. And I guess I'd have left Rhaegar as soon as possible had he come around to reveal to me that some ancient prophecy had motivated him to abduct me. I mean, ancient prophecy has nothing to do with me or my feelings, right? And people who love me should be triggered by me as a person to fall in love with me not by some weirdo symbolism connected to the ice element of my noble line. The idea that Lyanna could actually have read or studied the original prophecy only makes sense if we assume that Rhaegar took that prophecy with him when he went to the Riverlands. I don't find that very likely because that prophecy is likely to have been in the Red Keep not on Dragonstone considering that young Rhaegar read it as a boy in the Red Keep. And prophecy is, of course, completely unnecessary for a couple conceiving a child as you well know. We don't even have to assume Lyanna Stark wanted to have a child with Prince Rhaegar. The whole rape angle isn't completely out of the window yet. It seems there was definitely attraction and possibly even deep love between these two but this doesn't mean things didn't get complicated as things unfolded. Lyanna Stark isn't described as the kind of person who would allow Rhaegar to get away with anything she didn't like. 1 hour ago, J. Stargaryen said: I disagree. She was having his baby. And Rhaegar seemed to believe he needed three children to fulfill the prophecy. Again, she might have been forced to have his baby. Not because she was raped, necessarily, but also because she was carefully watched and had no means to conduct an abortion after she became pregnant. You are aware, I think, that babies don't go away just because a woman doesn't want to pregnant (anymore), right? What Rhaegar believed isn't what Lyanna believed (until we know that it was). 1 hour ago, J. Stargaryen said: Btw, if by "no reason to believe" you mean that we don't have any direct evidence, that's true, but I'd point out that we're probably not going to get into the details of RLJ until after it is revealed. It might be counterproductive to do it the other way around. I think we have more reason to believe that Lyanna had an agenda and goals of her own considering her personality rather than consider her to be converted to Rhaegar's beliefs in ancient prophecies. 1 hour ago, J. Stargaryen said: Yeah, but this particular Targaryen boy is meant to be important. So I think he'll have an important name. Again, I think Aemon is the most likely, but I think Aegon would also make a lot of sense. At least to me, those are the only two candidates. Well, naming the boy after the father is something that could happen, too. If Lyanna loved Rhaegar (or had rediscovered her love for Rhaegar on her deathbed) then it would also make sense for her to name her son by him after his father. It doesn't to have been Rhaegar. Could also be some sort of variation of the name, say, Rhaegal, Rhaegel, or Rhaegys (if that's a Valyrian name). Lyanna would have had more reason to name her son after his father than Aegon or Aemon. She had no connection to any of these people and such an idea has to presuppose that (1) Rhaegar actually talked to Lyanna about the name(s) he wanted to choose for their child (not unlikely but as of yet unconfirmed), (2) Rhaegar ever talked to Lyanna about why he named his son by Elia Aegon (possible but I see no reason why this should be the case), (3) Lyanna actually cared and continued to think about Rhaegar's mad ramblings about prophecy (I see no good reason as to why she should have believed any of that or thought in a way similar to Rhaegar's own mind), (4) Lyanna actually agreed that Rhaegar had been right to name the promised prince Aegon, agreed that their child was (now) the promised prince, and was of the opinion that he should therefore be named Aegon, too. That is way too far-fetched for me. I can see Lyanna giving her son the name Rhaegar chose for him. But I don't think she would have reached a Rhaegar-like naming decision more or less completely on her own. 1 hour ago, J. Stargaryen said: I feel fairly confident that Jon Snow has a secret true name. And the only reason to keep it a secret is because it would reveal his parentage. Which a Targaryen name would do, but a Stark name would not. So I think it's obvious that this secret true name is a Traditional Targaryen name. So, I'm sure Lyanna had her reasons for giving him that name. Which GRRM will reveal after RLJ. Technically speaking, I guess it's possible, like in a one-in-a-million kinda way, that his true name is Brandon Targaryen. But I don't think that makes sense, since there's no reason for Ned to call him Jon Snow instead of Brandon Snow in that case. I already agreed about that. I only brought that whole thing up because I find that idea more likely if we assume Lyanna chose a name on her own. Why should she go with a Targaryen name knowing that the Targaryens were finished? And knowing that the Targaryens nearly destroyed her entire family. 1 hour ago, J. Stargaryen said: Rhaegar chose the name Aegon for the child he believed to be the PtwP, which means Rhaegar thought the PtwP should be named Aegon. Seems pretty connected to me. The fact that he chose the Targaryen name doesn't negate that. Of course he did. Was he supposed to name him Azor Targaryen, or maybe Ernie? But Rhaegar didn't choose the name Aegon because he was supposed to be the promised prince. He chose a king's name for a boy who was supposed to be king one day. That boy also happens to be the promised prince in Rhaegar's mind but the text does not support your idea that Rhaegar named his son Aegon because he thought the promised prince should bear that name. That is essentially your invention. 1 hour ago, J. Stargaryen said: Maybe not the way you spin it. But I think your position is unnecessarily extreme. I've never felt like it made much sense to characterize Rhaegar's belief in prophecy as a negative. With the Others coming, Westeros is in need of a hero or three. So tell me, exactly how mad were Rhaegar's ramblings about prophecy? The mad ramblings are connected to the fact that Rhaegar the Presumptuous thinks destiny has chosen him not only to look for but also to create the promised prince. He thinks he has to do this kind of thing, and there is actually no reason for him to believe that. He has a younger brother, after all. Why can't Viserys be the father or grandfather of the promised prince? Or, you know, perhaps his parents are going to have another child who is the promised princess? He never thought about that, or did he? I mean, even if we would assume Jon Snow was the only savior or main hero of the story - he didn't wake dragons from stone, and he is not likely to do that. Even if he becomes a dragonrider and the leader of the fight against the Others he is going to win such a victory only because Daenerys did what she did - and her birth and rise to prophetic prominence is directly dependent on the Realm sinking into chaos, the downfall of the Targaryen dynasty, the libido of her mad father, the suffering of Queen Rhaella at her brother-husband's hands, the deaths of Viserys III, Rhaego, Khal Drogo, and Mirri Maz Duur. That's the main road to salvation (if the dragons are important) not Rhaegar's beliefs and actions. They might turn out to contribute and expand on it but right now I see no reason that Jon's role could not be played by some other guy with a less prestigious ancestry. If he also ends up developing special powers of his own that can only be explained by his special heritage I'm going to change my mind on that one. But right now he looks still pretty ordinary to me. In addition, we have no reason to believe Rhaegar actually knew anything about the Others or thought the promised prince had anything to do with them. Had that been the case Rhaegar should have done anything in his power to help the Night's Watch. In fact, all the Targaryen kings since Jaehaerys II should have done something of that sort. After all they all knew about the prophecy and believed in it. 1 hour ago, J. Stargaryen said: Again, yes, this is possible. But it's just speculation for now. I have to say, I'm kind of surprised how easily you are able to speculate about some things, but then have difficulty imaging why Lyanna would have given Jon a Targaryen name, or how she could have come to believe in the PtwP prophecy. Well, that question isn't that difficult to answer: 1. Lyanna Stark was still very young when she met Prince Rhaegar. There is no hint she was particularly interested in prophecy or magic. And if she was she would have focused on the traditions of the First Men and the old gods, not some Valyrian stuff. 2. Rhaegar has no proof that his mad ramblings about prophecy and saviors are actually correct. The educated members of nobility we meet in Westeros (like Catelyn, say, or even Cersei) usually don't believe in magic or prophecy without good reason. They are skeptical about superstition and even religion. Even the Starks no longer believe in the existence of the Others. It is the reader focusing so much on the prophecy and Rhaegar's obsession with it that makes it very tempting to assume that pretty much everybody Rhaegar had close relations with would have shared his view. But this is actually not very likely. 1 hour ago, J. Stargaryen said: Btw, apologies for the delayed response. I haven't had as much time for the forum lately. No harm done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heileen Posted November 7, 2016 Share Posted November 7, 2016 I've always wondered about this but since Elia Martell was from Dorne, would she have agreed to Rheagar's "plan" to have a third child by a mistress (Lyanna)? Especially since Lyanna was from a very well-known and powerful noble Stark house from the North. Personally, I don't think she would have since if Rhaegar had another child (a son no less), it would have caused some strife within the succession crisis from her own trueborn children. But since Lyanna and Rhaegar had a son, (Jon) what would have happened to Rhaegar picking his heir? P.S. I'm sorry if this seems so off topic. And if you guys have replied/talked about this in previous pages in this thread, I would love to read them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Varys Posted November 7, 2016 Share Posted November 7, 2016 1 hour ago, Heileen said: I've always wondered about this but since Elia Martell was from Dorne, would she have agreed to Rheagar's "plan" to have a third child by a mistress (Lyanna)? Especially since Lyanna was from a very well-known and powerful noble Stark house from the North. Personally, I don't think she would have since if Rhaegar had another child (a son no less), it would have caused some strife within the succession crisis from her own trueborn children. I'd agree with you there. Even more so if we assume Rhaegar actually married Lyanna and Elia was aware of that. A paramour is one thing another wife a completely different thing. Legitimate children from such a union would inevitably became a threat to her own children. Not to mention that if Elia loved Rhaegar she wouldn't have liked the idea of him fucking another woman, nevertheless what people do in Dorne. I'm pretty sure many spouses in Dorne aren't particularly fond of the paramours their spouses entertain. But the biggest problem is the public humiliation of Elia and her house (and thus pretty much all Dorne) and the threat Lyanna would have posed to Elia's status as the future queen. If Lyanna and not Elia was the woman Rhaegar loved then Lyanna would have been the first woman of the Realm, not Elia. And that could reflect ill on her children even if Rhaegar I had confirmed Prince Aegon as his heir upon his ascension. Even if we assume things remained quiet in Rhaegar's days if there had been to rival male branches of House Targaryen (the Martell-Targaryens descended from Elia's and the Stark-Targaryens descended from Lyanna's son) then it is very likely that Rhaegar's grandchildren would have plunged the Realm into another Dance. Assuming people would have accepted a bigamist for their monarch. I don't think they would have. Even if Rhaegar had returned to KL in triumph - him setting up Lyanna Stark as his new wife and the future queen would have caused fierce opposition. This kind of thing would have had the potential for another civil war in Aerys II lifetime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MtnLion Posted November 7, 2016 Share Posted November 7, 2016 4 hours ago, Heileen said: I've always wondered about this but since Elia Martell was from Dorne, would she have agreed to Rheagar's "plan" to have a third child by a mistress (Lyanna)? Especially since Lyanna was from a very well-known and powerful noble Stark house from the North. Personally, I don't think she would have since if Rhaegar had another child (a son no less), it would have caused some strife within the succession crisis from her own trueborn children. But since Lyanna and Rhaegar had a son, (Jon) what would have happened to Rhaegar picking his heir? P.S. I'm sorry if this seems so off topic. And if you guys have replied/talked about this in previous pages in this thread, I would love to read them. What hints that we do have suggest that Rhaegar and Lyanna married. The substance is that Rhaegar loved his Lady Lyanna, and that Lyanna would not tolerate being placed in the position of mistress, even honored mistress. We also know that Elia and Rhaegar were in an arranged marriage, and that Rhaegar was "fond" of Elia. We don't have any particulars on Elia, other than another pregnancy would likely lead to her death. Don't be misled by the miscreants that flout bigamy being a problem for the Targaryens. Incest, which is said to be a real problem for the people of the realm to accept, was tolerated. Aerys and Rhaella were brother and sister. It stands to reason that bigamy would be more tolerated than Aerys' incestuous marriage, and both have precedent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
purple-eyes Posted November 8, 2016 Share Posted November 8, 2016 5 hours ago, MtnLion said: What hints that we do have suggest that Rhaegar and Lyanna married. The substance is that Rhaegar loved his Lady Lyanna, and that Lyanna would not tolerate being placed in the position of mistress, even honored mistress. We also know that Elia and Rhaegar were in an arranged marriage, and that Rhaegar was "fond" of Elia. We don't have any particulars on Elia, other than another pregnancy would likely lead to her death. Don't be misled by the miscreants that flout bigamy being a problem for the Targaryens. Incest, which is said to be a real problem for the people of the realm to accept, was tolerated. Aerys and Rhaella were brother and sister. It stands to reason that bigamy would be more tolerated than Aerys' incestuous marriage, and both have precedent. What hints do you have to suggest their marriage? Name them please. All you have is just that three KG at TOJ, but we were told specifically that KG can guard mistress and bastard, and there is absolutely no other case in the whole history, except mistress Lyanna and bastard Jon Snow. Rhaegar loved his lady Lyanna, not his princess Lyanna. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lojzelote Posted November 8, 2016 Share Posted November 8, 2016 17 hours ago, Lord Varys said: I'd agree with you there. Even more so if we assume Rhaegar actually married Lyanna and Elia was aware of that. A paramour is one thing another wife a completely different thing. Legitimate children from such a union would inevitably became a threat to her own children. Not to mention that if Elia loved Rhaegar she wouldn't have liked the idea of him fucking another woman, nevertheless what people do in Dorne. I'm pretty sure many spouses in Dorne aren't particularly fond of the paramours their spouses entertain. But the biggest problem is the public humiliation of Elia and her house (and thus pretty much all Dorne) and the threat Lyanna would have posed to Elia's status as the future queen. If Lyanna and not Elia was the woman Rhaegar loved then Lyanna would have been the first woman of the Realm, not Elia. And that could reflect ill on her children even if Rhaegar I had confirmed Prince Aegon as his heir upon his ascension. Even if we assume things remained quiet in Rhaegar's days if there had been to rival male branches of House Targaryen (the Martell-Targaryens descended from Elia's and the Stark-Targaryens descended from Lyanna's son) then it is very likely that Rhaegar's grandchildren would have plunged the Realm into another Dance. Assuming people would have accepted a bigamist for their monarch. I don't think they would have. Even if Rhaegar had returned to KL in triumph - him setting up Lyanna Stark as his new wife and the future queen would have caused fierce opposition. This kind of thing would have had the potential for another civil war in Aerys II lifetime. (I'll butt in!) I am of the opinion that Rhaegar and Lyanna did not marry, because the precedent for a polygamous marriage was quite weak. I think it's more likely that Rhaegar intended to legitimize any children Lyanna will have given him once he'd become the king. Yes, they would still carry a certain stigma with them, but the royal decree of legitimization where the king is the final and only authority could not be contested the same way like a polygamous marriage, where religious authorities and cultural sensibilities would ultimately get involved and cause a huge mess. Besides, polygamy is a Pandora's Box, better to be left shut. Elsewise any future rogue prince can marry whomever who wants and how many women he wants; and in the past it hadn't been possible, as we can clearly see on Daemon Targaryen's case. Daemon couldn't have had his marriage to Rhea Royce annulled without his brother's leave, and when his brother the king denied him, Daemon had been stuck with taking mistresses. The idea that he might had taken a second wife had not entered anybody's mind, and had it, I'm sure that Viserys would have had ruled it out immediately. Rhaegar had been in the same position towards Aerys as Daemon had been to Viserys. Regardless, the breech between Elia's and Lyanna's children could have been solved easily (at least in theory) - marry Elia's daughter to Lyanna's son, and in case Lyanna survived and had further children, marry Lyanna's daughter to Elia's son. Sure, Lyanna, Elia, and their families could protest, but the king is ultimately the person who has the right to arrange marriages for his family members. Should either side disobey, they would risk his disfavour and displacement from the line of succession. On one of your previous posts (the Rhaegar the Presumptuous point), I think that Rhaegar's conviction that he was The One was quite understandable. For long seventeen years Rhaegar was the only child of Aerys and Rhaella that survived the cradle. His survival, taken together with Ghost of High Heart's prophecy of a birth of a dragon and the salt and smoke symbolism of the Tragedy of Summerhal, it makes perfect sense that he would have been wed to the idea he's the Chosen One. (Accidentally, I have once watched a documentary on Hitler's psychology; apparently some believe that Hitler's twisted messiah complex might have had a connection to having been the only son in the family who survived early childhood, his mother's special boy.) Viserys' birth might not have given him a pause either, because first of all it wasn't a sure thing that this boy's longevity will be any better than his other siblings', and then, if it's not only hindsight speaking out of Barristan, Viserys started showing some rather troubling tendencies at a very young age. Also it appears that Aerys and Rhaella's marital relations stopped after the spare heir's birth until Aerys started to burn people alive during the Rebellion. (In fact, we can sort of say that there might not have been a Daenerys Stormborn if it was not for Rhaegar's actions.) For that matter, I also think that Rhaegar convinced himself that his union with Lyanna was fated. I believe he first fell in love with her at Harrenhal, but sadly returned to his normal life anyway. Only once he discovered that Elia may not be able to give him a third child, he might have considered Lyanna as an option, so he did more research on history and magical lore, noticed the Ice symbolism tied to House Stark, connected it with a Song of Ice and Fire (whatever it is supposed to be), and although he didn't care much about the Ice bit previously (Aegon's ancestry had nothing to do with Ice symbolism), now he saw the light... or saw what he wanted to see, as the wisdom of the books goes. Either way it would have been a convenient excuse/justification for him to elope with the girl he loved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ygrain Posted November 8, 2016 Author Share Posted November 8, 2016 26 minutes ago, lojzelote said: the precedent for a polygamous marriage was quite weak. The question then is, why include the precedent at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lojzelote Posted November 8, 2016 Share Posted November 8, 2016 Just now, Ygrain said: The question then is, why include the precedent at all. I think that GRRM might have intended to go that route once, but changed his mind. The way this issue was presented in TWoIaF, it would be ridiculous if Rhaegar expected for it to be taken seriously. It was never accepted. Aegon, Rhaenys, and Visenya are the big exception to the rule, and that mostly because they are viewed as these almost mythical founding figures. They had also been married at the time when Targaryens had been still only Lords of Dragonstone on their small separate island. But Maegor's marriages had been met with public outrage, and considering what how he had been treating his numerous wives as well as that he is till this day regarded as a cruel tyrant, I doubt it gained the concept of polygamy a good name. After that no Targaryen ever had done that, not even the ones who had trouble siring a son with their wife or had any other problem with her. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Varys Posted November 8, 2016 Share Posted November 8, 2016 13 minutes ago, lojzelote said: (I'll butt in!) Be my guest. This a discussion board, after all ;-). 13 minutes ago, lojzelote said: I am of the opinion that Rhaegar and Lyanna did not marry, because the precedent for a polygamous marriage was quite weak. I think it's more likely that Rhaegar intended to legitimize any children Lyanna will have given him once he'd become the king. Yes, they would still carry a certain stigma with them, but the royal decree of legitimization where the king is the final and only authority could not be contested the same way like a polygamous marriage, where religious authorities and cultural sensibilities would ultimately get involved and cause a huge mess. Besides, polygamy is a Pandora's Box, better to be left shut. Elsewise any future rogue prince can marry whomever who wants and how many women he wants; and in the past it hadn't been possible, as we can clearly see on Daemon Targaryen's case. Daemon couldn't have had his marriage to Rhea Royce annulled without his brother's leave, and when his brother the king denied him, Daemon had been stuck with taking mistresses. The idea that he might had taken a second wife had not entered anybody's mind, and had it, I'm sure that Viserys would have had ruled it out immediately. Rhaegar had been in the same position towards Aerys as Daemon had been to Viserys. I'm with you on the validity of polygamous marriages in the wake of the Maegor disaster. But this doesn't mean Rhaegar didn't go through with the whole thing against his father's wishes. I'm sure that the Lyanna-Rhaegar marriage wouldn't be accepted by the king, the court, the Faith and the majority of the lords but that doesn't mean that Rhaegar didn't marry Lyanna. I'm also inclined to believe that Rhaegar and Lyanna disappeared as long as they did because Aerys II saw their marriage as treason and called for their heads. If that's the case then it is also very likely that Rickard and Brandon were executed as Rhaegar/Lyanna's accomplices with Aerys accusing them of being involved in that unlawful marriage (which would have been as confirmation of the Rhaegar-Stark conspiracy Aerys saw at Harrenhal with Lyanna's coronation). 13 minutes ago, lojzelote said: Regardless, the breech between Elia's and Lyanna's children could have been solved easily (at least in theory) - marry Elia's daughter to Lyanna's son, and in case Lyanna survived and had further children, marry Lyanna's daughter to Elia's son. Sure, Lyanna, Elia, and their families could protest, but the king is ultimately the person who has the right to arrange marriages for his family members. Should either side disobey, they would risk his disfavour and displacement from the line of succession. That wouldn't have helped if Lyanna's son and his wife had thought that he should be king. 13 minutes ago, lojzelote said: On one of your previous posts (the Rhaegar the Presumptuous point), I think that Rhaegar's conviction that he was The One was quite understandable. For long seventeen years Rhaegar was the only child of Aerys and Rhaella that survived the cradle. That he was the only one that survived, taken together with Ghost of High Heart's prophecy of a birth of a dragon and the salt and smoke symbolism of the Tragedy of Summerhal, it had to make a perfect sense to him he's the Chosen One. (Accidentally, I have once watched a documentary on Hitler's psychology; apparently some believe that Hitler's twisted messiah complex might have had a connection to having been the only son in the family who survived early childhood, his mother's special boy.) It is perhaps understandable to a degree but nothing that the average person (Lyanna, say) would believe, too, just because Rhaegar did it. Besides, it is one thing for Jaehaerys II (and Aemon, Aerys, and Rhaella) believing that Rhaegar was the promised prince and feeding him that idea and him later believing that he was supposed to father the promised prince. Nobody told him that. It was just a mad fancy he developed for no good reason. Aerys and Rhaella are given a special role in the creation of the promised prince by the Ghost's prophecy but no prophecy ever mentioned Rhaegar. 13 minutes ago, lojzelote said: Viserys' birth might not have given him a pause either, because first of all it wasn't a sure thing that this boy's longevity will be any better than his other siblings', and then, if it's not only hindsight speaking out of Barristan, Viserys started to show some rather troubling tendencies at a very young age. That it is irrelevant because the Ghost's prophecy did not mention that the promised prince would be born soon. All it said is that he would be born from the line of Aerys and Rhaella, necessitating their marriage. It could have been their great-great-grandchild for all we know. Aerys II himself was also mad, by the way, but he was still destined to play a crucial role in the creation of the promised prince. Thus it is quite obvious that mad fathers don't pose a problem on that front. Rhaegar himself also didn't think he shouldn't be king or the promised prince because his father was a madman. Why then would he judge Viserys in such a fashion? 13 minutes ago, lojzelote said: Also it appears that Aerys and Rhaella's marital relations stopped after the spare heir's birth until Aerys started to burn people alive during the Rebellion. (In fact, we can sort of say that there might not have been a Daenerys Stormborn if it was not for Rhaegar's actions.) Sure, but Viserys was already alive and if he lived he could have multiple children of his own. As could Rhaegar's own children by Elia. And, frankly, Aerys began burning people shortly after Duskendale. The war wasn't necessary for Dany's conception, merely Aerys getting aroused by watching people burn. 13 minutes ago, lojzelote said: For that matter, I also think that Rhaegar convinced himself that his union with Lyanna is fated. I believe he first fell in love with her at Harrenhal, but sadly returned to his normal life anyway. Only once he discovered that Elia may not be able to give him a third child, he might have considered Lyanna as an option, so he did more research on history and magical lore, noticed the Ice symbolism tied to House Stark, connected it with a Song of Ice and Fire (whatever it is supposed to be), and although he didn't care much about the Ice bit previously (Aegon's ancestry had nothing to do with Ice symbolism), now he saw the light... or saw what he wanted to see, as the wisdom of the books goes. Either way it would have been a convenient excuse/justification for him to elope with a girl he loved. There was no need for Rhaegar to research the ice symbolism. It is pretty straightforward thing for the Starks. It is clear that Rhaegar decided to do something with Lyanna after Elia could no longer bear children but I doubt the symbolism caused him to take her. It would have been because he was in love with her. Why search for some other woman to have a child with if you are already in love? 1 hour ago, lojzelote said: I think that GRRM might have intended to go that route once, but changed his mind. The way this issue was presented in TWoIaF, it would be ridiculous if Rhaegar expected for it to be taken seriously. It was never accepted. Aegon, Rhaenys, and Visenya are the big exception to the rule, and that mostly because they are viewed as these almost mythical founding figures. They had also been married at the time when Targaryens had been still only Lords of Dragonstone on their small separate island. But Maegor's marriages had been met with public outrage, and considering what how he had been treating his numerous wives as well as that he is till this day regarded as a cruel tyrant, I doubt it gained the concept of polygamy a good name. After that no Targaryen ever had done that, not even the ones who had trouble siring a son with their wife or had any other problem with her. Again, I agree there but it is still possible Rhaegar ignored all that. He would have failed spectacularly, for course, but he could still have tried. The idea that he tried in secret makes little sense, though, because secret marriages are much easier set aside or ignored than public ones. If Rhaegar had just shown up at court one day with Lyanna and a little brat in tow Aerys II and the High Septon could easily enough have declared that child a bastard, annulling this 'second marriage', and executing Rhaegar for treason because he had taken a second wife without royal permission (and in the process disinheriting all the children the traitor fathered - after all, we know from AGoT that traitors breed other traitors). We know that kings can punish their family members for marrying without their permission. Aenys I and Viserys I were lenient monarchs who liked to get along with their brothers but even they exiled them after they married without their permission. And Viserys I even forced Daemon to set his paramour away, making it pretty clear that a king could easily enough break a (married) couple apart if set his mind to it. But Aerys II wasn't lenient at all. He mistrusted his heir and already searched for a pretext to get rid of him. Rhaegar taking another wife would have been the ideal reason to burn him alive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ygrain Posted November 8, 2016 Author Share Posted November 8, 2016 1 hour ago, lojzelote said: I think that GRRM might have intended to go that route once, but changed his mind. The way this issue was presented in TWoIaF, it would be ridiculous if Rhaegar expected for it to be taken seriously. It was never accepted. Aegon, Rhaenys, and Visenya are the big exception to the rule, and that mostly because they are viewed as these almost mythical founding figures. They had also been married at the time when Targaryens had been still only Lords of Dragonstone on their small separate island. But Maegor's marriages had been met with public outrage, and considering what how he had been treating his numerous wives as well as that he is till this day regarded as a cruel tyrant, I doubt it gained the concept of polygamy a good name. After that no Targaryen ever had done that, not even the ones who had trouble siring a son with their wife or had any other problem with her. First, TWOIAF is inaccurate in many respects and may not present an accurate view of polygamy. Second, the guy who is to father PTWP and create three dragon heads is not exactly an example of conform thinking. So, even if the marriage was considered unacceptable, it still doesn't mean Rhaegar wouldn't go for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RumHam Posted November 8, 2016 Share Posted November 8, 2016 12 minutes ago, Ygrain said: First, TWOIAF is inaccurate in many respects and may not present an accurate view of polygamy. That's just you dismissing evidence that doesn't fit your vision of how the story is going to unfold. There's really no reason to think the worldbook's treatment of historical polygamy would not be accurate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Varys Posted November 8, 2016 Share Posted November 8, 2016 43 minutes ago, RumHam said: That's just you dismissing evidence that doesn't fit your vision of how the story is going to unfold. There's really no reason to think the worldbook's treatment of historical polygamy would not be accurate. Everything is a huge conspiracy to prevent people from learning what the real take on polygamy is. Even George is on that. I've seen him when I attended the last conspiracy meeting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Damein Blackfyre true king Posted November 8, 2016 Share Posted November 8, 2016 George has said laws mean nothing when you have dragons. These Targaryeans think they are dragons which is why they feel they are above the law. Polygamy and incest is against the 7. I have never read any thoughts or discord with polygamy nor incest in the eyes of the old gods. If Rhaegar and Lyanna got married it was Infront of the old gods so some rules may not apply. Finally we saw the faith hated incestual marriages and even Aegon V hated it and thought it was one of the problems with his family. However he loved his son and daughter and begrugently accepted their nuptials after their vow was consummated. So the church didn't like incest but the Dragons didn't care and still practiced it, why don't y'all think they would have ignored polygamy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.