Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
bilplat

Question Regarding Conception Date Relative to Marriage Date...

10 posts in this topic

Disclaimer: I am not presenting a new theory and all situations described below are rhetorical.

So, let's just imagine for a second that two characters, let's say R and L, do the nasty. Out of love or a seeming necessity, it happened. A month later, L somehow tells R that she's pregnant. Some secret messages are passed and then R seemingly kidnaps L. A secret marriage takes place.

My question is: if we ignore R's possible non-bachelor status, and we assume the legitimacy of the marriage can be proved, is the child a bastard or legitimate? Conceived out of wedlock, but birthed in wedlock.

Again, not trying to push the theory that R impregnated L at the tourney at Harrenhal and then stole her and married her later. For the sake of the answer I want, you can even replace R and L with X and Y. I'm literally only wondering how a situation like this would work out for the child's bastard status.

Edited by bilplat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In real medieval times, the Church recognized bastards if the natural parents subsequently married (even if they did after the child's birth). If Westeros works the same way, and the marriage is considered valid, then a potential son of R+L would not be a bastard.

There would be another option. We know that in Westeros a king can legitimize a bastard and that can't be undone (as happened with Aegon IV). Therefore, any king could remove the bastardy from the children of such an union.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, The hairy bear said:

In real medieval times, the Church recognized bastards if the natural parents subsequently married (even if they did after the child's birth). If Westeros works the same way, and the marriage is considered valid, then a potential son of R+L would not be a bastard.

There would be another option. We know that in Westeros a king can legitimize a bastard and that can't be undone (as happened with Aegon IV). Therefore, any king could remove the bastardy from the children of such an union.

 

Perfect answer. Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The presence of 3 kings guard and their conversation with Ned is evidence enough that Jon was considered the legitimate heir. As Ned points out in a pretty lawerly way, there is no reason for them to be there other than protecting a royal heir. He gives them every chance to decide that their duty is elsewhere and they refuse. 

Sure there are rules/customs, but they tend to be ignored as often as enforced. If Rhaegar says that the kid is the royal heir and the guards agree, then that's how it is (until Ned's intervention). Legitimacy seems like more a matter of negotiation between interested parties.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Winds of Winter blow cold said:

Also there is evidence that Targs practiced polygamy

Link just out of curiosity? I might even have seen it before and just forgotten. Also do you mean polygamy as in having mistresses which I know many kings had (Bloodraven's mother was a king's mistress IIRC), or multiple wives?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Praetor Xyn said:

Link just out of curiosity? I might even have seen it before and just forgotten. Also do you mean polygamy as in having mistresses which I know many kings had (Bloodraven's mother was a king's mistress IIRC), or multiple wives?

Multiple wives.

 

@OP; shotgun weddings can be a thing in Westeros so the child is trueborn.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's what shotgun weddings (crossbow weddings, in this case? poleaxe weddings?) were all about. As long as the child is born in wedlock, all is legit.

All theology aside, I guess practical reasons played a part: the day of wedding, and the day of birth, are witnessed, solid, verifiable. The date of conception is a guesstimate, even more so with medieval-level medicine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Praetor Xyn said:

Link just out of curiosity? I might even have seen it before and just forgotten. Also do you mean polygamy as in having mistresses which I know many kings had (Bloodraven's mother was a king's mistress IIRC), or multiple wives?

Maegor the Cruel had six wives at the same time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to imagine that non-incest polygamy would raise many eyebrows after Aeg the Un. I suspect Ned's motive in hiding Jon's identity was as much for the child's life as the good of the realm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.