Jon was born a bastard and remains a bastard.

[Ygrain]

39 minutes ago, Jon Ice-Eyes said:

He can make up laws, precedents, and justifications either way, if he cares to.

GRRM: There was and is precedent.

[Jon Ice-Eyes]

Well yeah. No one can question the existence of precedents in the story. 

I just mean that The George could easily invent an as-yet unseen (by readers) treaty, or even royal court case, where the issue was firmly legally decided either way. 

But my money is on it being a tradition that fell out of practice before anyone had to make any law or anything like one. And now some jerk (Rhaegar) has just called the whole thing into question. Everyone argues. Jon wins by being just a super neat dude. He rides a dragon wolf and slams out a rippin guitar solo. End

[The Twinslayer]

48 minutes ago, Jon Ice-Eyes said:

This. 

And there is some historical precedent for kings doing polygamy to the consternation of the church. A Merovingian or two in the sixth century took more than one wife, and caught tons of shit from their bishops. But Merovingians were particularly powerful at the time, and so gave zero fucks. It's more about power than anything else. 

Where history can't help us figuring out Rhaegar. No one tried to marry two wives since, so there The George would be making it up. And in that case, it will be whatever he wants. He can make up laws, precedents, and justifications either way, if he cares to. My guess would be that Rhaegar was planning on being King soon, so could do the same thing, with the popular support of forcing an evil lunatic to abdicate. 

It is true that GRRM has some ability to make up new things, but we are talking about what is most likely based on what we have read so far.  To me, if GRRM writes that Rhaegar and Lyanna were married and expected anyone to accept that marriage as valid it will look like a retcon.

GRRM has made clear that a marriage is only valid if it is generally accepted.  Consider this exchange between Dany and the Green Grace:

"If we should wed by Westerosi rites..."  "The gods of Ghis would deem it no true union.  In the eyes of the city you would be the noble Hizdahr's concubine, not his lawful wedded wife.  Your children would be bastards.  Your Worship must marry Hizdahr in the Temple of the Graces, with all the nobility of Meereen on hand to bear witness to your union."  

If Rhaegar tried to sell Lyanna on a polygamous marriage, someone should have given her exactly that speech.  Aegon the Conqueror was able to get away with it because he and his wives had control of three mature dragons and they used them to subjugate the kings of Westeros.  Dany could not get away with a wedding that would be unacceptable to Meereen because she did not control her dragons or the city.  

Rhaegar's position was even weaker: he would have to ask people to accept not just his attempt to usurp his father but also his attempt to revive polygamy.  I find that possibility very unrealistic.  

So I doubt there was a secret Rhaegar/Lyanna marriage but I don't think it matters because it would be no true union and Jon would still be a bastard.     

8 minutes ago, Ygrain said:

GRRM: There was and is precedent.

Yes.  There was and is precedent for lords exercising the "right" of first night, too, but that does not make it legal.  

[Ygrain]

11 minutes ago, The Twinslayer said:

Yes.  There was and is precedent for lords exercising the "right" of first night, too, but that does not make it legal.  

Except that it is explicitely stated that the "right" was made illegal and GRRM never referred to it "was and is precedent".

Why do I even bother.

[Lord Varys]

3 hours ago, Sea Dragon said:

Wow! Did I somehow miss the release of this book? I was so excited to hear about this several months ago but I didn't realize it had been released yet. I love the Targaryens and I still need to read the big World book (summertime with no classes) and I will head to Amazon now to buy this one.

It will come out in October. George has read from at a couple of times, usually only covering the youth of Aegon's sons and the reign of King Aenys. The reign of Maegor was not covered. Our only source for that is TWoIaF and a two page unedited excerpt from TSotD from a very early sample page.

2 hours ago, SFDanny said:

Once again, not only do we have no evidence that Aegon made a pact with the Faith to do away with polygamy and incest, but the actions of both sons show clearly they did not see themselves or their children (in Aenys case) as bound by the Faith's rules.

Aegon had no need for such a pact in any case. He deferred to the Faith and accepted its rules. His sons eventually broke with his conciliatory politics, perhaps because they were morons, perhaps because Aegon and Visenya fed them the idea that they and their blood were very special and better than 'lesser men'. We don't know. Aenys and Maegor both must have gotten the idea that they could do what they did from somewhere. I'm inclined to believe Aegon would have gone along with the incest if his sons had had sisters to marry. Aenys wouldn't have married Aegon to Rhaena had he not believed it necessary.

2 hours ago, SFDanny said:

I'd suggest, that for those who practice polygamy, it isn't being unfaithful to take a second wife.

But the majority religion in Westeros doesn't accept polygamy. A religion the Targaryens follow, too. And the Targaryens don't practice polygamy, either. Some did, but it was uncommon and nothing that was part of their identity or tradition. 

2 hours ago, SFDanny said:

Let's not mix up the question of the king's right to determine who his children marry with a ban on polygamy. That no king after Maegor engaged in polygamy and no king gave is assent to such a marriage is not in any way the same as a ban. If you want a similar situation to Aegon and Maegor one has to look to Daenerys to see if she takes Ser Jorah's advice. Rhaegar's situation is closer to Maegor's when he first takes a second wife. It is likely Aerys would have reacted negatively to such a unapproved marriage, just as Aenys did. But that doesn't mean either king banned the practice or that Rhaegar could not have married Lyanna without setting aside Elia.

Again, the Targaryens do follow the Faith, the scriptures of the Faith forbid polygamy, and no Targaryen king who ever married in a sept in the ways of the Faith ever practiced polygamy unchallenged. Polygamy would only be legal if Jaehaerys I did rewrite the holy scriptures of the Faith. Else Maegor's polygamy was as the Faith saw - invalid and unlawful - and Aegon the Conqueror was a foreign invader following different beliefs and customs - a curiosity, not a role model for his successors.

Daenerys can do as she pleases while she is in Essos. In Westeros she will either bow to the Faith as any king now will have to or she will beat the Faith into submission.

We don't really care whether Rhaegar could or could not marry Lyanna. We care whether such a marriage was worth anything or seen as legitimate by the people of Westeros. And whether any such legitimacy (if existing) extended to any issue from that marriage. And that is pretty unlikely in light of what we know.

[Jon Ice-Eyes]

28 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Aegon had no need for such a pact in any case. He deferred to the Faith and accepted its rules.

Yeah, except in so far as his marriages were concerned. As we all know and agree. This isn't worth disputing, to anyone. 

 

28 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

We don't really care whether Rhaegar could or could not marry Lyanna. We care whether such a marriage was worth anything or seen as legitimate by the people of Westeros. And whether any such legitimacy (if existing) extended to any issue from that marriage

The existence of precedent (again, not up for dispute) will make it a wee bit easier than if it were out of the blue. But yeah, Jon's hypothetical claim to legitimacy will be WAY more influenced by how many existential threats to Westeros he eliminates before anyone makes said claim. The precedent will make the thing easier to swallow, but his real power will be the deciding factor. Context is everything. Like in real life. 

[SFDanny]

17 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Aegon had no need for such a pact in any case. He deferred to the Faith and accepted its rules. His sons eventually broke with his conciliatory politics, perhaps because they were morons, perhaps because Aegon and Visenya fed them the idea that they and their blood were very special and better than 'lesser men'. We don't know. Aenys and Maegor both must have gotten the idea that they could do what they did from somewhere. I'm inclined to believe Aegon would have gone along with the incest if his sons had had sisters to marry. Aenys wouldn't have married Aegon to Rhaena had he not believed it necessary.

The bolded represents the core of our disagreement, LV. There is nothing that shows he did this regarding his family. If we want to encapsulate Aegon's policy towards the Seven Kingdoms, it was to allow everyone to go about their normal business as it had been done, but they must accept Targaryen rule. Not that the Targaryens accepted the Faith ruling over the royal family in any matters. That is how Aegon treated the former kings of the Seven Kingdoms, and that is how he treated their religious leaders. Preach what you want to the masses and to your lords, but accept our rule. The High Septon of Aegon's conquest accepted this bargain. And why not? Aegon could have come telling everyone they must convert to the religion of Valyria practiced by the Targaryens on Dragonstone, but he didn't need a religious war to define his victory. He wanted fealty, and he got it from everyone outside of Dorne. He accepted both the Faith and the worship of the Old Gods, but he allowed neither of them to tell his family what they could or could not do.

34 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

But the majority religion in Westeros doesn't accept polygamy. A religion the Targaryens follow, too. And the Targaryens don't practice polygamy, either. Some did, but it was uncommon and nothing that was part of their identity or tradition.

What the majority accepts for themselves has nothing to do with what the Targaryens accept as possible for the royal family.That should be painfully obvious in the Faith's acceptance of Aegon and his sister's marriage and the actions of Aenys and Maegor regarding their arranged marriages - which the Faith viewed as incest and blasphemous polygamy. It should be obvious because of the fact brother/sister marriage continued on up to Aerys II Targaryen's days, and that during the entirety of Targaryen rule there are those who still think polygamy as an acceptable option for the royals. 

To the bolded, this is just false. The polygamous marriage of Aegon, Visenya, and Rhaenys is the sigil of their House. The three are the founders of their dynastic rule over Westeros. The three are the core of the identity of House Targaryen. They define the tradition and identity of what it means to be a Targaryen. Yes, polygamy was rare, but with Aegon, Visenya, and Rhaenys it was central to their rule.

50 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Again, the Targaryens do follow the Faith, the scriptures of the Faith forbid polygamy, and no Targaryen king who ever married in a sept in the ways of the Faith ever practiced polygamy unchallenged. Polygamy would only be legal if Jaehaerys I did rewrite the holy scriptures of the Faith. Else Maegor's polygamy was as the Faith saw - invalid and unlawful - and Aegon the Conqueror was a foreign invader following different beliefs and customs - a curiosity, not a role model for his successors.

LV, this is just wrong. Insert the words brother/sister marriage for polygamy in every part of this paragraph and you will see just how wrong it is.

53 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Daenerys can do as she pleases while she is in Essos. In Westeros she will either bow to the Faith as any king now will have to or she will beat the Faith into submission.

I don't think anyone thinks the new High Septon is going to welcome Targaryen rule back. There will be a fight.

56 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

We don't really care whether Rhaegar could or could not marry Lyanna. We care whether such a marriage was worth anything or seen as legitimate by the people of Westeros. And whether any such legitimacy (if existing) extended to any issue from that marriage. And that is pretty unlikely in light of what we know.

The "could or could not" is fairly important in understanding what took place in the backstory. Whether or not someone claiming to be the legitimate child of Rhaegar and Lyanna is accepted by everyone is indeed a good question. My answer is that it doesn't really matter what everyone thinks. Just like last time, it matters what the person controlling the dragons thinks.

[Lord Varys]

4 minutes ago, Jon Ice-Eyes said:

Yeah, except in so far as his marriages were concerned. As we all know and agree. This isn't worth disputing, to anyone. 

His own marriages never came up. The High Septons treated them as if they did not exist. They did not condemn them but they also did not declare them legal (and they certainly did not bless them). But they made it clear to him that he better not continue his incestuous and polygamous ways or suffer the consequences. And Aegon did. The best example is the cancellation of the Maegor-Rhaena betrothal Visenya suggested (which was also opposed by Aenys and Alyssa, by the way) and the subsequent Maegor-Ceryse marriage.

4 minutes ago, Jon Ice-Eyes said:

The existence of precedent (again, not up for dispute) will make it a wee bit easier than if it were out of the blue.

We could see this about any First Men house, though. There were at least on Durrandon and Gardener king with multiple wives. Yet this doesn't mean that a Baratheon, Florent, or Tyrell of today has a right to revive such an ancient custom. Things changed.

4 minutes ago, Jon Ice-Eyes said:

But yeah, Jon's hypothetical claim to legitimacy will be WAY more influenced by how many existential threats to Westeros he eliminates before anyone makes said claim. The precedent will make the thing easier to swallow, but his real power will be the deciding factor. Context is everything. Like in real life. 

He can do everything he wants, without a blood claim he will remain nothing. This is feudal monarchy, after all. And a bastard can become king, too, as Benedict Rivers and Ronard Storm prove. And Daemon Blackfyre came pretty close, too.

But it is very unlikely that we won't see Jon being adopted into the Targaryen family. That is what his story will be about. If his origin story didn't figure into all that it would be very, say, superficial. This doesn't mean he has to rule over anything in the end - for that he has to survive the series - but it makes it not completely unlikely.

[The Twinslayer]

1 hour ago, Ygrain said:

Except that it is explicitely stated that the "right" was made illegal and GRRM never referred to it "was and is precedent".

Why do I even bother.

Because you enjoy the discussion as much as I do.

The question we are exploring is whether polygamy was outlawed during the reign of Jaehaerys I.  GRRM has not told us outright, but he has left some clues in the books.  We are discussing those clues.

If I have followed your logic, you are saying that GRRM has, in fact, told us that polygamy is legal by stating (in an SSM) that there was, and is, precedent for it.  

My point here is just that the existence of precedent does not make something legal.  Precedent just means that something happened before.  For example, there is precedent for a member of the kingsguard killing the king he swore to protect and then continuing to serve in the kingsguard.  That does not mean it is an accepted practice or that if it happens again, the person responsible will be permitted to stay in the kingsguard.  

[Jon Ice-Eyes]

41 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

His own marriages never came up. The High Septons treated them as if they did not exist. They did not condemn them but they also did not declare them legal (and they certainly did not bless them). But they made it clear to him that he better not continue his incestuous and polygamous ways or suffer the consequences. And Aegon did. The best example is the cancellation of the Maegor-Rhaena betrothal Visenya suggested (which was also opposed by Aenys and Alyssa, by the way) and the subsequent Maegor-Ceryse marriage.

We could see this about any First Men house, though. There were at least on Durrandon and Gardener king with multiple wives. Yet this doesn't mean that a Baratheon, Florent, or Tyrell of today has a right to revive such an ancient custom. Things changed.

He can do everything he wants, without a blood claim he will remain nothing. This is feudal monarchy, after all. And a bastard can become king, too, as Benedict Rivers and Ronard Storm prove. And Daemon Blackfyre came pretty close, too.

But it is very unlikely that we won't see Jon being adopted into the Targaryen family. That is what his story will be about. If his origin story didn't figure into all that it would be very, say, superficial. This doesn't mean he has to rule over anything in the end - for that he has to survive the series - but it makes it not completely unlikely.

Umm... you know that the Maegor thing was all about thr High Septon getting a Hightower into the royal family and not about any of the other stuff, right? Whatever reasons he publicly gave were pretext. So no. And the fact that incest continued rampantly in the royal family thereafter shows that there was no conviction behind the High Septon's opposition. And whatever political capital the church had that allowed this thing was spent -- or taken -- pretty quickly after. 

As for othrr houses doing polygamy... they could. IF -- and it's a big if -- they could get their peers and subjects to go along with it. Citing precedent would be one tool, not very powerful but definitely there, for them to use in this rhetorical battle. 

As for Jon's blood claim, no one was ever talking about that. I was talking about him being seen as legitimate. Two different things. Although you are right that legitimacy isn't required. See for example William the Conqueror, aka. William the Bastard. 

 

[Lord Varys]

2 minutes ago, Jon Ice-Eyes said:

Umm... you know that the Maegor thing was all about thr High Septon getting a Hightower into the royal family and not about any of the other stuff, right? Whatever reasons he publicly gave were pretext. So no. And the fact that incest continued rampantly in the royal family thereafter shows that there was no conviction behind the High Septon's opposition. And whatever political capital the church had that allowed this thing was spent -- or taken -- pretty quickly after.

You have to wait for TSotD to get more details on that. But what you will read there is going to show you that Aegon did defer to the High Septon in this matter because he vehemently objected to the Maegor-Rhaena match. He ruled the Targaryens in this matter, not the other way around. Aegon also saw wisdom in the Hightower match, that's why he agreed to it. He wanted to have stronger ties to the Hightowers as well as to the Faith.

2 minutes ago, Jon Ice-Eyes said:

As for othrr houses doing polygamy... they could. IF -- and it's a big if -- they could get their peers and subjects to go along with it. Citing precedent would be one tool, not very powerful but definitely there, for them to use in this rhetorical battle.

The way things are in Westeros is that you would commit political suicide if you would cite any precedents allowing you to practice polygamy. Polygamy isn't something that is practiced in the Seven Kingdoms. It is even rarer than incest.

2 minutes ago, Jon Ice-Eyes said:

As for Jon's blood claim, no one was ever talking about that. I was talking about him being seen as legitimate. Two different things. Although you are right that legitimacy isn't required. See for example William the Conqueror, aka. William the Bastard.

Since Jon isn't even a Targaryen and is most likely never going to be seen as such unless another Targaryen ends up legitimizing, adopting, or acknowledging him as such he isn't legitimate. The boy was simply disguised too well. He is Eddard Stark's son now. If nobody in House Targaryen (or camp Targaryen) ends up believing the story of his parentage he will never be a Targaryen in the eye of the public. Not even a Targaryen bastard.

58 minutes ago, SFDanny said:

The bolded represents the core of our disagreement, LV. There is nothing that shows he did this regarding his family. If we want to encapsulate Aegon's policy towards the Seven Kingdoms, it was to allow everyone to go about their normal business as it had been done, but they must accept Targaryen rule. Not that the Targaryens accepted the Faith ruling over the royal family in any matters. That is how Aegon treated the former kings of the Seven Kingdoms, and that is how he treated their religious leaders. Preach what you want to the masses and to your lords, but accept our rule. The High Septon of Aegon's conquest accepted this bargain. And why not? Aegon could have come telling everyone they must convert to the religion of Valyria practiced by the Targaryens on Dragonstone, but he didn't need a religious war to define his victory. He wanted fealty, and he got it from everyone outside of Dorne. He accepted both the Faith and the worship of the Old Gods, but he allowed neither of them to tell his family what they could or could not do.

TSotD makes it clear that Aegon did defer to the Faith in all thing connected to the Faith. And when he married Maegor to Ceryse and not to Rhaena he showed that the High Septon ruled even his own family.

58 minutes ago, SFDanny said:

What the majority accepts for themselves has nothing to do with what the Targaryens accept as possible for the royal family.That should be painfully obvious in the Faith's acceptance of Aegon and his sister's marriage and the actions of Aenys and Maegor regarding their arranged marriages - which the Faith viewed as incest and blasphemous polygamy. It should be obvious because of the fact brother/sister marriage continued on up to Aerys II Targaryen's days, and that during the entirety of Targaryen rule there are those who still think polygamy as an acceptable option for the royals. 

We are not talking about the time after Jaehaerys I right now. We are talking about the time before and there it was clear. The Faith suffered Aegon's two sister-wives but they did not accept the marriage. They did not declare it legal and had their septons and begging brothers continue to preach against it.

58 minutes ago, SFDanny said:

To the bolded, this is just false. The polygamous marriage of Aegon, Visenya, and Rhaenys is the sigil of their House. The three are the founders of their dynastic rule over Westeros. The three are the core of the identity of House Targaryen. They define the tradition and identity of what it means to be a Targaryen. Yes, polygamy was rare, but with Aegon, Visenya, and Rhaenys it was central to their rule.

Aegon, Visenya, and Rhaenys were also siblings. That's what the three-headed dragon symbolizes. They are one being with three heads. The three heads grow out of one body, House Targaryen.

58 minutes ago, SFDanny said:

LV, this is just wrong. Insert the words brother/sister marriage for polygamy in every part of this paragraph and you will see just how wrong it is.

The difference is that no Targaryen king ever tried to make polygamy a common practice among its members. It is one thing for Aegon or Dany to marry a hypothetical sibling and quite another to cite obscure precedents to justify polygamy. People accept now that the Targaryens are special and marry their siblings. But they don't accept that they have multiple spouses.

There is a fundamental difference there that @The Twinslayer pointed out. The very marriage concept of the Faith defines it as a union between one husband and one wife. Two siblings can marry each other, too. It is not part of their marriage vows to routinely confirm that they are not siblings. If they do this is a vile crime and a sin, punishable by death. But a polygamous marriage just isn't a marriage. It is invalid because it goes against the vow of fidelity you swear during a wedding. 

58 minutes ago, SFDanny said:

I don't think anyone thinks the new High Septon is going to welcome Targaryen rule back. There will be a fight.

The High Septon is likely to welcome Prince Aegon. He is not unlikely to even declare, crown, and anoint him King Aegon VI Targaryen. He is not an abomination born of incest, and he either is or can pose as a devout follower of the Seven. He is everything the sparrows want in a king.

Dany is a female and might actually follow a different religion when she finally comes to Westeros.

58 minutes ago, SFDanny said:

The "could or could not" is fairly important in understanding what took place in the backstory. Whether or not someone claiming to be the legitimate child of Rhaegar and Lyanna is accepted by everyone is indeed a good question. My answer is that it doesn't really matter what everyone thinks. Just like last time, it matters what the person controlling the dragons thinks.

The Faith Militant didn't care about Balerion and Vhagar (or Quicksilver) when they nearly put down the Targaryens. The High Septon crowned and anointed Aenys I and then he denounced and deposed him. Dragons aren't everything. And most certainly not when Dany comes to Westeros. Her dragons will never grow as large as Aegon's.

And nobody will think Jon Snow is a Targaryen (descendant) unless some Targaryen also believes this. Why should they?

[SFDanny]

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

And nobody will think Jon Snow is a Targaryen (descendant) unless some Targaryen also believes this. Why should they?

Will be gone until late tomorrow, so just let me say there are a variety of ways Daenerys could be convinced. Not only through witnesses like Howland Reed, but through the combination of that with her vision of the blue flower at a wall of ice, and - here's the most important way it could happen - if Jon is accepted as a dragonrider by one of her dragons. All speculation, but I think that would do it.

[Lord Wraith]

5 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

The High Septon is likely to welcome Prince Aegon. He is not unlikely to even declare, crown, and anoint him King Aegon VI Targaryen. He is not an abomination born of incest, and he either is or can pose as a devout follower of the Seven. He is everything the sparrows want in a king.

Dany is a female and might actually follow a different religion when she finally comes to Westeros.

I agree this is probably will happen. Also Dany is likely to return to Westeros with the fanatics of Rhllor, Eunch Slave soldiers, and Dothraki and Moonboy knows what else. None of these are likely to endear her to anyone in Westeros.

[Lord Varys]

20 hours ago, SFDanny said:

Will be gone until late tomorrow, so just let me say there are a variety of ways Daenerys could be convinced. Not only through witnesses like Howland Reed, but through the combination of that with her vision of the blue flower at a wall of ice, and - here's the most important way it could happen - if Jon is accepted as a dragonrider by one of her dragons. All speculation, but I think that would do it.

Well, you have to have a lot of goodwill or gullibility to get convinced by the tale we are spinning here just by some witnesses. I mean, sure, Howland, Wylla, and some Daynes might know and tell the truth. But what is their word going to be worth against the impeccable integrity of Lord Eddard Stark? The man claimed Jon Snow was his son.

If Daenerys doesn't want to believe this story she won't believe it. People are not likely going to be able to force her or her closest allies. Even Tyrion might not if it turned out he was Aerys II's bastard, and if he is legitimized by Daenerys as Tyrion Targaryen after he claims one of her dragons. After all, this could only weaken his own position.

And with the entire Aegon story it is exceedingly unlikely that anyone is going to believe that this man is the *real* son of Rhaegar after another has already played that part. People like compelling tales but this would be a little bit much, especially in light of the fact that they would have to believe that Jon is not, in fact, Eddard's son. That would be pretty hard to swallow.

The fact that Jon may be able to claim a dragon doesn't prove anything nor is it likely that this will result in Dany suddenly considering him a member of her family. If Brown Ben claimed a dragon she is not going to call him 'Ben Targaryen' thereafter. And even Tyrion is only likely to be legitimized as a Targaryen if somebody like Selmy actually confirms that he is Aerys' son.

Rhaenyra only legitimized Addam and Alyn of Hull on Jace's urging. Hugh, Ulf, and Nettles remained bastards and smallfolk. They just got a knighthood and eventually the promise to be made lords.

If Jon's case is to be different there has to be a good explanation for this, and that's most likely where the romance thing is going to come in. Dany will make Jon a Targaryen because she wants to, because he may already be her lover or even consort by that time.

17 hours ago, Lord Wraith said:

I agree this is probably will happen. Also Dany is likely to return to Westeros with the fanatics of Rhllor, Eunch Slave soldiers, and Dothraki and Moonboy knows what else. None of these are likely to endear her to anyone in Westeros.

That is probably correct. We'll have to wait and see how much power the Faith will have to stop or challenge her, though. Winter will come, and Aegon, Euron, Cersei, Stannis, Littlefinger, Catelyn, Doran and Arianne, etc. will make the Realm bleed even more. Unless Dany's enemies - or a coalition of her enemies - deal her a major blow in the road or at sea, before she can land in Westeros, they should be quickly overwhelmed.

But if the Faith and the High Septon denounce you as a pretender, false king, tyrant, demon-worshiper, etc. you should be quickly gone or face a lot of troubles in any case because this will inevitably cause a huge chunk of the population of Westeros to turn against you. And no king or queen can rule against the will or the people. 

This is the really interesting part in TSotD - the suddenness and completeness in which the High Septon could turn the people of Westeros against Aenys I and the Targaryens. Aenys I was pretty popular and well-loved among the commons, just as his father had been. He was perceived as weak by Visenya and quite a few lords as well as the Faith, but the people loved him. Until the High Septon told them to hate him because of the polygamy and incest thing. The smallfolk of the Seven Kingdoms love the Seven much more than any king.

And this never changed. Maegor and Jaehaerys I disarmed the Faith but they never attacked the Faith itself nor did they try to suppress worship of the Seven. If they had done this they would have been toppled in a fortnight. And in that sense the Faith never truly lost its power. They lost their armies but never the control over the minds and hearts of the majority of the people. And we see how strong the sparrow movement (which was essentially what remained of the Poor Fellows till this day) was even before King Tommen formally overturned Maegor's laws and reformed the Faith Militant. The sparrows had stars carved in their flesh before Cersei came to the Great Sept, just as they were carrying axes (as the Poor Fellows did) in defiance of Maegor's laws. They even identify as 'poor fellows' on the road (in Brienne's first chapter) before they reach King's Landing.

This movement didn't come from nowhere.

[Lord Wraith]

5 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Well, you have to have a lot of goodwill or gullibility to get convinced by the tale we are spinning here just by some witnesses. I mean, sure, Howland, Wylla, and some Daynes might know and tell the truth. But what is their word going to be worth against the impeccable integrity of Lord Eddard Stark? The man claimed Jon Snow was his son.

If Daenerys doesn't want to believe this story she won't believe it. People are not likely going to be able to force her or her closest allies. Even Tyrion might not if it turned out he was Aerys II's bastard, and if he is legitimized by Daenerys as Tyrion Targaryen after he claims one of her dragons. After all, this could only weaken his own position.

And with the entire Aegon story it is exceedingly unlikely that anyone is going to believe that this man is the *real* son of Rhaegar after another has already played that part. People like compelling tales but this would be a little bit much, especially in light of the fact that they would have to believe that Jon is not, in fact, Eddard's son. That would be pretty hard to swallow.

The fact that Jon may be able to claim a dragon doesn't prove anything nor is it likely that this will result in Dany suddenly considering him a member of her family. If Brown Ben claimed a dragon she is not going to call him 'Ben Targaryen' thereafter. And even Tyrion is only likely to be legitimized as a Targaryen if somebody like Selmy actually confirms that he is Aerys' son.

Rhaenyra only legitimized Addam and Alyn of Hull on Jace's urging. Hugh, Ulf, and Nettles remained bastards and smallfolk. They just got a knighthood and eventually the promise to be made lords.

If Jon's case is to be different there has to be a good explanation for this, and that's most likely where the romance thing is going to come in. Dany will make Jon a Targaryen because she wants to, because he may already be her lover or even consort by that time.

That is probably correct. We'll have to wait and see how much power the Faith will have to stop or challenge her, though. Winter will come, and Aegon, Euron, Cersei, Stannis, Littlefinger, Catelyn, Doran and Arianne, etc. will make the Realm bleed even more. Unless Dany's enemies - or a coalition of her enemies - deal her a major blow in the road or at sea, before she can land in Westeros, they should be quickly overwhelmed.

But if the Faith and the High Septon denounce you as a pretender, false king, tyrant, demon-worshiper, etc. you should be quickly gone or face a lot of troubles in any case because this will inevitably cause a huge chunk of the population of Westeros to turn against you. And no king or queen can rule against the will or the people. 

This is the really interesting part in TSotD - the suddenness and completeness in which the High Septon could turn the people of Westeros against Aenys I and the Targaryens. Aenys I was pretty popular and well-loved among the commons, just as his father had been. He was perceived as weak by Visenya and quite a few lords as well as the Faith, but the people loved him. Until the High Septon told them to hate him because of the polygamy and incest thing. The smallfolk of the Seven Kingdoms love the Seven much more than any king.

And this never changed. Maegor and Jaehaerys I disarmed the Faith but they never attacked the Faith itself nor did they try to suppress worship of the Seven. If they had done this they would have been toppled in a fortnight. And in that sense the Faith never truly lost its power. They lost their armies but never the control over the minds and hearts of the majority of the people. And we see how strong the sparrow movement (which was essentially what remained of the Poor Fellows till this day) was even before King Tommen formally overturned Maegor's laws and reformed the Faith Militant. The sparrows had stars carved in their flesh before Cersei came to the Great Sept, just as they were carrying axes (as the Poor Fellows did) in defiance of Maegor's laws. They even identify as 'poor fellows' on the road (in Brienne's first chapter) before they reach King's Landing.

This movement didn't come from nowhere.

I really wish we had more knowledge of the Faith Militant in the time before the Targaryen. I see them in a similar vein to the Catholic Church at the height of its temporal power.

I agree with your take on the power of the High Sparrow will have in the upcoming books. It will certainly be interesting to see how this plays out.

[SFDanny]

12 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Well, you have to have a lot of goodwill or gullibility to get convinced by the tale we are spinning here just by some witnesses. I mean, sure, Howland, Wylla, and some Daynes might know and tell the truth. But what is their word going to be worth against the impeccable integrity of Lord Eddard Stark? The man claimed Jon Snow was his son.

If Daenerys doesn't want to believe this story she won't believe it. People are not likely going to be able to force her or her closest allies. Even Tyrion might not if it turned out he was Aerys II's bastard, and if he is legitimized by Daenerys as Tyrion Targaryen after he claims one of her dragons. After all, this could only weaken his own position.

And with the entire Aegon story it is exceedingly unlikely that anyone is going to believe that this man is the *real* son of Rhaegar after another has already played that part. People like compelling tales but this would be a little bit much, especially in light of the fact that they would have to believe that Jon is not, in fact, Eddard's son. That would be pretty hard to swallow.

The fact that Jon may be able to claim a dragon doesn't prove anything nor is it likely that this will result in Dany suddenly considering him a member of her family. If Brown Ben claimed a dragon she is not going to call him 'Ben Targaryen' thereafter. And even Tyrion is only likely to be legitimized as a Targaryen if somebody like Selmy actually confirms that he is Aerys' son.

Rhaenyra only legitimized Addam and Alyn of Hull on Jace's urging. Hugh, Ulf, and Nettles remained bastards and smallfolk. They just got a knighthood and eventually the promise to be made lords.

If Jon's case is to be different there has to be a good explanation for this, and that's most likely where the romance thing is going to come in. Dany will make Jon a Targaryen because she wants to, because he may already be her lover or even consort by that time.

My friend, I think you vastly underestimate the effect of a dragon choosing Jon as a rider would have on Daenerys. If that happens - and that is a major "if" in our story - it would tell Dany much more than it is likely Jon has a drop of Targaryen blood in his background. It tells her Jon is someone she can at last trust. Can trust, and must trust with her "child." But this is looking forward and speculating what will happen. Hopefully we will still by around and debating the likelihood  of such a choosing by the time Martin gets around to the reveal.

[Lord Varys]

11 minutes ago, SFDanny said:

My friend, I think you vastly underestimate the effect of a dragon choosing Jon as a rider would have on Daenerys. If that happens - and that is a major "if" in our story - it would tell Dany much more than it is likely Jon has a drop of Targaryen blood in his background. It tells her Jon is someone she can at last trust. Can trust, and must trust with her "child." But this is looking forward and speculating what will happen. Hopefully we will still by around and debating the likelihood  of such a choosing by the time Martin gets around to the reveal.

Jon is most likely going to be the last character to claim a dragon. If Brown Ben, Victarion, Tyrion, Aegon, Euron, etc. come first she is not going to trust him because of this. It is not likely her trust in any of those characters is going to be justified. The way the story is set up indicates that Viserion and Rhaegal both will be claimed by their first riders in the very near future. 

Keep in mind that Jon's mother - if he was Ned's son - still could be anyone. We don't know if Ashara Dayne has Targaryen ancestors (could be, especially through a Martell-Dayne match) nor whether a woman from the Riverlands or wherever Ned supposedly met Jon's mother might be the daughter or granddaughter of a Targaryen bastard.

If Dany didn't want to believe the Lyanna-Rhaegar story she could easily enough find another good explanation as to why Jon became a dragonrider. She could even use the whole skinchanger thing against him. Perhaps that and not his Targaryen blood allowed him to bond with a dragon? Then he doesn't even have to have a single drop of Targaryen blood.

[SFDanny]

18 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Jon is most likely going to be the last character to claim a dragon. If Brown Ben, Victarion, Tyrion, Aegon, Euron, etc. come first she is not going to trust him because of this. It is not likely her trust in any of those characters is going to be justified. The way the story is set up indicates that Viserion and Rhaegal both will be claimed by their first riders in the very near future. 

Keep in mind that Jon's mother - if he was Ned's son - still could be anyone. We don't know if Ashara Dayne has Targaryen ancestors (could be, especially through a Martell-Dayne match) nor whether a woman from the Riverlands or wherever Ned supposedly met Jon's mother might be the daughter or granddaughter of a Targaryen bastard.

If Dany didn't want to believe the Lyanna-Rhaegar story she could easily enough find another good explanation as to why Jon became a dragonrider. She could even use the whole skinchanger thing against him. Perhaps that and not his Targaryen blood allowed him to bond with a dragon? Then he doesn't even have to have a single drop of Targaryen blood.

We are talking about very different things. I'm not talking about Jon claiming a dragon. I'm talking about a dragon claiming Jon as its rider.

[Lord Varys]

18 minutes ago, SFDanny said:

We are talking about very different things. I'm not talking about Jon claiming a dragon. I'm talking about a dragon claiming Jon as its rider.

That doesn't happen. Men claim dragons, not the other way around. The dragons just accept a rider ... or they don't.

[The Commentator]

3 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

That doesn't happen. Men claim dragons, not the other way around. The dragons just accept a rider ... or they don't.

You apply for the privilege and hope you are accepted.  If you're not, well, you won't have to worry about putting in an unemployment claim.