Damsel in Distress

Jon's bastard status.

60 posts in this topic

On 8/21/2017 at 8:06 AM, Ygrain said:

http://www.westeros.org/Citadel/SSM/Entry/Asshai.com_Forum_Chat

Maegor the Cruel has multiple wives, from lines outside his own, so there was and is precedent. However, the extent to which the Targaryen kings could defy convention, the Faith, and the opinions of the other lords decreased markedly after they no longer had dragons. If you have a dragon, you can have as many wives as you want, and people are less likely to object.

Note the bolded, please - WAS and IS precedent. So, technically, polygamy is still on the table; the problem is that the present day Targs may not have the power to force the issue, but this doesn't mean they cannot at least try. Especially when their incestuous marriages keep defying convention, the Faith and the opnions of the other lords just fine.

 

Making new threads to repeat your opinion doesn't make it any more valid.

The fact that there is precedent for something does not mean that it is legal or moral.  It just means that it has happened before.  There is precedent for a member of the Kingsguard to sleep with the King's mistress.  That does not make it okay for future Kinsguard to do that.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's the thing...

If Jon is legitimate, then he is.

If Jon is a bastard, he can be legitimized. 

We're not going to know which he is until the author decides to tell us.

So other than killing time, what is the point of the discussion?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Lady Blizzardborn said:

So other than killing time, what is the point of the discussion?

What's the point of any discussion here? I guess I would say it's to share ideas and form a greater appreciation of the material in yourself or in others. And to build up a giant list of "I told you so's":P

This particular topic does have quite a bit of interest since it went for over 20 pages on the last thread recently although I suspect there is a lot of repetition in the arguments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Makk said:

What's the point of any discussion here? I guess I would say it's to share ideas and form a greater appreciation of the material in yourself or in others. And to build up a giant list of "I told you so's":P

This particular topic does have quite a bit of interest since it went for over 20 pages on the last thread recently although I suspect there is a lot of repetition in the arguments.

That's fair. I was just wondering if there was a deeper point to the thread that I'd missed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

just to my two cents: for one, outside of baelor the blessed, i dont get the impression that the targaryen dynasty was particular pious and caring about the opinions of the faith. i will grant that it seems reasonable that once they no longer had dragons, they kept closer to the tenets of the Faith, save for the incest thing, but i feel that was more necessity than willingness.

and for another thing, about why the KG didnt let honorable ned up to see lyanna. they dont know him personally, hes a stranger, and south of the neck, kinslaying seems more acceptable. like backroom operations, knows it going to happen even if frowned on acceptable, since politics are just as cut throat amongst family members as between houses. what they do know is that he was fighting alongside robert baratheon, the leading figurehead of the rebellion, who has legit cause to want to kill lyanna's baby. for all they know, ned might pick his best friend over his sister. none of the KG are from the north, they dont fully appreciate the importance of family in the north, compared to the south. so to them its entirely possible, even probable that ned might turn their charge over to robert, or even tywin. i think by this point they have heard about the sack of kingslanding and what tywin's men did. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

we have to look at that situation for the perspective of the KG. they dont ned, this the young man, who hsnt had that 10+ years to build that reputation that hes famous for at the beginning of the story. what they do know is that he is robert's best friend. can they honestly risk handing over rhaegar's lover and child when the possibility exists to them that ned could hand lyanna and jon over to robert and tywin in turn?

and doesnt the bastard inherent regardless if all the trueborn children are dead?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Graydon Hicks said:

we have to look at that situation for the perspective of the KG. they dont ned, this the young man, who hsnt had that 10+ years to build that reputation that hes famous for at the beginning of the story. what they do know is that he is robert's best friend. can they honestly risk handing over rhaegar's lover and child when the possibility exists to them that ned could hand lyanna and jon over to robert and tywin in turn?

and doesnt the bastard inherent regardless if all the trueborn children are dead?

Well if they don't know him, why wouldn't they ask Lyanna? Just what do you think they were planning to actually do with this bastard boy they are literally willing to die and kill for? What does "now it begins" mean?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Dance with Dragons story was about a succession clusterf***. There’s no clear heir for Winterfell after Robb since all of the Stark kids have strong positives and strong negatives. Joff was legit or not based on what people wanted him to be. Renly or Stannis was the true heir of Robert based on whatever reasons people wanted to believe. Aegon is unprovable, so people will believe if they want to or not if they don’t. Dany’s claim has points for and against her.

There’s a strong pattern here of creating circumstances where people have good reasons to accept the heir and good reasons to reject the heir meaning they’ll believe whatever benefits them. Guessing Jon will be legit, but it will be through a really slimy way which people will have good reason to reject if they feel Dany or Aegon or someone else would benefit them more.

Basically, characters will follow or not follow whomever they want and the text is sure to provide a good reason for whatever their choice may be.

 

Share this post


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

Well if they don't know him, why wouldn't they ask Lyanna? Just what do you think they were planning to actually do with this bastard boy they are literally willing to die and kill for? What does "now it begins" mean?

i dont know why they wouldnt ask her, maybe she was in no fit state to tell them. maybe up to that moment ned did believe that rhaegar had kidnapped he. maybe they were just all belligerent fools. 

as for they're plans for after the baby's birth, i have a couple of theories.

1: they whisk baby jon away to the free cities, maybe to wherever ser willem darry, who isnt in the KG, that was jonothor darry, is waiting with viserys and daenerys. there they can try and plan out some way to retake the throne from robert the usurper.

2: they consolidate themselves in dorn or the reach, the two kingdoms that kept faith with house targaryen in general.

3: after depositing baby jon with a trusted caretaker, dont ask me who, dayne and whent nad hightower go on a suicide mission to eliminate robert. given their ability, that just may be possible.

and i have no idea what "now it begins" means, maybe it was a personal saying of dayne when ever he began a fight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Ralphis Baratheon said:

"Now it begins" Is a pretty epic thing to say before a sword fight to the death.

Not quite as epic as, 'No, now it ends.'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Graydon Hicks said:

i dont know why they wouldnt ask her, maybe she was in no fit state to tell them. maybe up to that moment ned did believe that rhaegar had kidnapped he. maybe they were just all belligerent fools. 

as for they're plans for after the baby's birth, i have a couple of theories.

1: they whisk baby jon away to the free cities, maybe to wherever ser willem darry, who isnt in the KG, that was jonothor darry, is waiting with viserys and daenerys. there they can try and plan out some way to retake the throne from robert the usurper.

2: they consolidate themselves in dorn or the reach, the two kingdoms that kept faith with house targaryen in general.

3: after depositing baby jon with a trusted caretaker, dont ask me who, dayne and whent nad hightower go on a suicide mission to eliminate robert. given their ability, that just may be possible.

and i have no idea what "now it begins" means, maybe it was a personal saying of dayne when ever he began a fight.

1 - No, they have already dismissed this. They consider Jon and/or Lyanna more important.

Quote

 

“Ser Willem Darry is fled to Dragonstone, with your queen and Prince Viserys. I thought you might have sailed with him.”

“Ser Willem is a good man and true,” said Ser Oswell.

“But not of the Kingsguard,” Sir Gerold pointed out. “The Kingsguard does not flee.”

“Then or now,” said Ser Arthur. He donned his helm.

“We swore a vow,” explained old Ser Gerold.

 

2 - And do what? I don't really consider this an answer. What is so important if Jon is a bastard?

3 - A caretaker. Perhaps someone the mother, Lyanna, knows? But it seems they would rather kill the best possible candidate for some reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

do you know what consolidate means? they would be using those regions that kept faith as a starting point to counter over throw robert. and so whtat if he is a bastard? with both rhaenys and aegon dead, then he inherits regardless.

and for trying to kill ned, they dont know if they can trust him. he is best friends with the guy that just killed their prince and help overthrow the dynasty they swore to protect. they arent northmen, they understand how important family is in theor culture, beyond the obvious blood allegiances they are used to in the south. there has never, to my knowledge, ever been a northmen in the KG, so they dont have that cultural insight that we do as readers. we know ned would do anything to protect his sister and her child, regardless who the father is, but they dont. in the south, someone in neds position is just as likely to kill little jon to appease the new king as they are to protect him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jon may or may not be a bastard - I believe it's all in where you are standing. In the end, Jon's status will be whatever it has to be, regardless of what it was when he was born.

Regarding Jon's legitimacy as Rhaegar's son, there are two points worth considering:

1) Succession laws are there to prevent a war every time a king dies. Unfortunately, there are still situations where succession wars occur. One of the things we can learn about Westeros from these novels is that, from an objective viewpoint, the existence of a single, uncontested rightful heir to the throne is much rarer than one would think, and even when such a person exists, there is no guarantee that he will be the king the realm needs - just look at Aegon the Unworthy or the Mad King. (We also know that a king who was rumored to be a bastard - Daeron II - became a good king, who reigned for a long time. Another king that was rumored to be a bastard - Joffrey - was a terrible king with a very short reign.) Like it or not, the Seven Kingdoms are at the moment torn by wars. There is no "rightful heir" whose right to the throne cannot be questioned one way or another. One war has just ended, leaving a little boy of questionable legitimacy on the throne - a puppet of dubious advisers, none of whom is able to truly fill the power vacuum created. One pretender from Essos has already landed on the eastern coast, and there is another, equipped with dragons, whose purpose is to (re)conquer. In the meantime, there is a horrible threat to all humanity growing beyond the Wall. To survive, Westeros will need a real leader, not a puppet king. This seems to be precisely a political situation in which the finer aspects of succession laws tend to be forgotten, because the need to survive comes first.

2) In fact, we can't even find a unified, well constructed system of laws in the Seven Kingdoms, one that would provide for all situations. There are laws based on custom, there are laws decreed by kings, there are the laws of the gods / the Faith and there are precedents, which can be (but don't need to be) used in a legal debate. These laws coming from various sources can sometimes be in conflict with each other, some of them vary from region to region, sometimes they can be changed by the powers that be, and basically anything can be a claim that can be interpreted or used as a claim.

In my opinion, when (and if) the question of Jon's status as a bastard vs a legitimate son of Rhaegar Targaryen comes up in the story, the information that various characters will have will be just enough to provide arguments both to those who want to see him as a bastard and to those who want to see him as legitimate. For example. a polygamous marriage (if the writer takes that road) has precedents in Westeros. Of course, the circumstances were different then than in the case of Rhaegar. The circumstances are rarely exactly the same, after all. You can decide whether you want to look at  the similarities (the precedents themselves) or the differences (the exact circumstances). Every character who makes this decision will be influenced by what political outcome they want. Whichever side will have more power (and power is a shadow on the wall, which lies where people believe it lies) will be "right" in the end. 

I am quite sure we won't get a clear case from GRRM. There are signs (and even precedents, lol)  indicating that he has set up a situation which will become more ambiguous when more details come to light. In the end, it will be the role Jon is going to play that decides his "official" status, not some sort of conclusive proof that all Westeros would receive. Jon will definitely play a major role in what is going to happen. If he can fulfill this role as a bastard, then no one will care (least of all Jon himself) about his legitimacy. If there are people who, for some reason, find that they need Jon as a legitimate Targaryen or, for that matter, as a legitimate Stark, then they will accept him as legitimate on any grounds they can think of, and I believe we can trust GRRM to make sure they will have grounds. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Excellent post, Julia H.

When the time comes then - regardless of legalities - the people with the power to do something about the situation at hand will do what they feel that needs to be done.

If takes Jon Snow becoming High Septon to save the World - then High Septon he will be :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just putting it out there, but even being a bastard wouldn't' necessarily be a serious impediment to Jon's theoretical inheritance of the Iron throne. In medieval times Castile, Portugal and Naples each had illegitimate sons gain the throne, though only the last inherited his crown in a normal succession. Portugal saw King João/John I elected to the throne in order to preserve the country's independence (his niece Beatrice was married to the King of Castile and her inheritance would mean Portugal would be forced into a union) while in Castile Pedro the Cruel fought and lost a civil war with his bastard half-brother, who became Enrique II. Both founded some of the most famous dynasties in Iberian history: the Aviz of Portugal and Trastámara of Castile (later Castile and Aragon then ultimately Spain). Naples was conquered by King Alfons V of Aragon (himself a Trastámara) and when the King died childless he left his Neapolitan realm to his eldest son Ferrante I.

Even England has had an illegitimate monarch. Elizabeth I was proclaimed a bastard by her father Henry VIII after he divorced and executed Anne Boleyn. Unlike her half-sister Mary, Elizabeth never had her parent's marriage retroactively re-legalized. So technically England's greatest Queen was a bastard. Hell we even have an example in ASOIAF, when Robb named Jon as his heir after Bran and Rickon's deaths were announced.

So if the last male of a dynasty is illegitimate (in the case of Portugal) or is more popular and more powerful than the legitimate King (as in Castile) then it's not impossible for a bastard to become King. It's even possible to legally inherit the throne as Naples and England proved.

So ultimately whether or not Jon's parents (whomever they may be in the books, there's always that far out possibility) were married isn't important. If Jon has the supporters, backing (and will) to become King than he will.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/20/2017 at 8:06 PM, Noble Lothar Frey said:

 Polygamy is not legal and not accepted.  Yes, Aegon had multiple wives but that happened under Valyrian customs before he conquered westeros.  The situations of Aenys and Maegor are different. 

The great bastards only became legit because the sitting king, Aegon IV, legitimized them.  And that was not widely accepted.  No way King Aerys the Second would legitimize Lyanna's children.  As a matter of fact, he would close the doors on any possibility of them ever becoming heirs to the throne.  He would prevent them from becoming legit.  It is already known that he disinherited Rhaegar's line and passed the inheritance to Prince Viserys.  That ends any and all future claims that Rhaegar's line may have had in addition to them having permanent bastard status. 

That is the sort of action Aerys would take.  The sort of action his advisers would suggest.  He would make sure none of Rhaegar's children from Lyanna would ever inherit his throne.  The children of such a pairing will be a bastard any way because Rhaegar was already married and that marriage was already consummated. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/20/2017 at 10:16 PM, Hodor the Articulate said:

There's a glaring flaw in argument that the KG must have been at the TOJ because baby Jon was King. It's built on the premise that the KG follows and protects only (or primarily) the King. But if this is so, why didn't they abandon Rhaegar and head back to King's Landing as soon as they knew war was breaking out? Or when Rhaegar died (Aerys was still alive at that point)? Or when Rhaella crowned Viserys?

The three Kingsguard remained loyal to King Aerys II.  They really only had two choices on that day:  1) Bend the knee to Robert or 2) Die fighting.  They chose to die fighting because the king that they swore to protect died.  There was no reason for them to continue living.  And Ned did his best to convince them to bend their knees and accept Robert as their king.  They refused.   A fight to the death could not be avoided.  They were not there to protect Lyanna and her bastard.  

They were trapped in Dorne.  The rebels had already taken the ports.  There was no way they can get to King Viserys III. 

Edited by Widowmaker 811

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Sidiciede

1 hour ago, Widowmaker 811 said:

1 - The three Kingsguard remained loyal to King Aerys II. 

2 - They really only had two choices on that day:  1) Bend the knee to Robert or 2) Die fighting. 

3 - They were trapped in Dorne.  The rebels had already taken the ports.  There was no way they can get to King Viserys III. 

1 - I see them more as loyal to Rheagar than Aerys. Just a gut feeling ...

2 - I see - "suicide by Stark" :D

3 - IMO not true - they could had scooted over the mountains to Starfell. Or some other south Dornish or Reacher port.

BTW - if there was a baby at ToJ, then Ned, Howland, with said "baby" and some sort of "milk provider" crossed 350 miles (as the crow flies) of mountains to get from ToJ to SF ...

Edited by TMIFairy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, TMIFairy said:

I see them more as loyal to Rheagar than Aerys. Just a gut feeling ...

I agree with this. I think Oswell and Arthur specifically had chosen who they were going to follow before the rebellion ever happened. They were his men. I wouldn't even be shocked to learn that they bent the knee to Rhaegar, that they had already taken him as their king.

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