Jon is not in the line of succession

[Nittanian]

56 minutes ago, Reekazoid said:

People forget this fact.  The Valyrian freehold ruled Essos for centuries, thus it would be ridiculous to assert that a significant portion of the population of the Free Cities doesn't carry some of those genes. Especially if you consider that whilst the nobility can be persnickety about marriage, they are much less fussy about casual sex with commoners and slaves.

I like the ambiguity of Nettles. Did Sheepstealer accept her because she actually was a dragonseed, or did the dragon eventually trust this commoner because of her persistent offerings of food? 

[Dragonsbone]

On 14.11.2017 at 5:43 AM, Noble Lothar Frey said:

R + L = J is not a proven theory.  The youtube channels of The Order of the Greenhand and Preston Jacobs eloquently made their case against this flimsy theory of R + L = J.

Of course R+L=J is not proven. Why else would would it be discussed in the first place? The Order of the Greenhand and Preston Jacobs were, the last time I checked, not GRRM. Neither where they involved in the writing of the book series. Also, they are the worst channels in the fandom, since they don't examine the series neutral and logically by proving their arguments with the written material. Whenever one of their theories don't match with the timeline, they claim GRRM has made a mistake in the timeline. You can not get more ridiculous than this. "The author must be wrong, because otherwise my tinfoil bullshit won't add up". That's why this whole point of you does not make any sense. First stating something obvious, then backing up your argument with (bad) Youtubers. 

On 14.11.2017 at 5:43 AM, Noble Lothar Frey said:

Even if R + L = J is proven, Jon is still a bastard.  Polygamy is not legal in Westeros.  The child of these two will be bastards.  An annulment with his wife is not likely because Rhaegar + Elia was consummated and they have their children to prove it.

Aegon I had two wifes. The septons did not liked it either. But anyway, what does his bastard status matter, if Jon is the hero that saves the realm from the Others and gets his support by the whole Kingdom?

And how do you exactly know, which other possibilities of annulment exist in Westeros. So far, we have like zero information on that matter. 

 

On 14.11.2017 at 5:43 AM, Noble Lothar Frey said:

King Aerys disinherited Rhaegar's children.  Any child of Rhaegar and Lyanna, even if Rhaegar pulled a divorce and somehow got his second marriage legalized, are no longer in the line of succession because Aerys chose Prince Viserys to be his heir.  Viserys became King Viserys III when his mother, Queen Rhaella, crowned him on Dragonstone.  This removed Aegon and Jon from the line of succession.

Aerys the mad King, who was overthrown by a rebellion you mean? Jeez, I wonder when exactly he put Robert Baratheon in the line of succession, because I could have sworn that Robert was the King after Aerys. His words must have mean a lot to Westeros I guess. Surely the people of Westeros will consider his last will when discussing who to rule.

On 14.11.2017 at 5:43 AM, Noble Lothar Frey said:

Jon is a sworn brother of the Night's Watch.  Taking the Black means you give up any and all claims.  Aemon Targaryen took the black to permanently remove himself from the line of succession. 

Except  that no one from the Night's Watch ever died and got resurected. The vow of the Night's Watch ends with death, which Jon fullfilled. What is after that, is completely uncovered by the law of the Night's Watch, since it is not something that was thought to ever be needed. Resurrections are not that comon. 

 

On 14.11.2017 at 5:43 AM, Noble Lothar Frey said:

Jon committed treason against the Night's Watch, supported Stannis, sent Mance Rayder loose on the north, broke his oaths, and got himself executed for treason.  He's dead.

At this point you make your whole argument completely irrelevant. If you think Jon stays dead, what is the point of this discussion? If he stays dead, obviously he won't rule as a King. You literally killed your whole post with this. 

 

On 14.11.2017 at 5:43 AM, Noble Lothar Frey said:

Jon does not look like a Targaryen.  He looks the opposite.  DNA testing has not been invented yet and like I said above, he is a bastard and Rhaegar's children got disinherited. 

LOOL. Really?? He does not look like a Targaryen??? What does that change please? Is he the only Targaryen with no silver hairs? Oh the irony! The series begun with a King who had a golden haired son. That son, even not being his real son, was crowned King. 

Sorry to say it, but all your arguments make zero sense.

[The Commentator]

1 hour ago, Bael's Bastard said:

Incest is a custom that goes back to the dragon riding families before the Doom. That means they preferred to marry their own close relatives even over other dragon riding families. The implication is that the dragon riding families kept their blood "pure" even from each other. So no, I don't think descendants of dragon riding families other than Targaryens would have much success with Targaryen dragons, which are the only dragons that have been around the last four hundred years.

We are dealing with an advanced race but still they are humans.  It's a good bet those Valyrian dragonlords slept around outside their marriage.  The resulting child will be a bastard and don't present much of a threat.  The blood of Old Valyria is everywhere. 

[Bael's Bastard]

27 minutes ago, Widowmaker 811 said:

We are dealing with an advanced race but still they are humans.  It's a good bet those Valyrian dragonlords slept around outside their marriage.  The resulting child will be a bastard and don't present much of a threat.  The blood of Old Valyria is everywhere. 

Descendants of old Valyria might be everywhere, but I see no reason to think that the blood of dragon lord families is interchangeable when it comes to each family's dragons. The only dragons over the last four centuries have been Targaryen dragons, and their seed, legit or otherwise, is mostly in Westeros.

[Pikachu101]

20 hours ago, Megorova said:

Someone will have to unite people in upper part of Westeros, and lead them against Undead Army. And all others are too busy with their fighting for who will sit on Iron Throne. Starks, Tullys, Lannisters, Tyrells, Greyjoys etc. didn't cared about people, they just wanted to get the Crown for themselves, or for the sake of revenge, or power. While Jon was always doing what was best for people.

You just explained why Jon can't be king:

1. He has no support
2. No one knows who he is
3. No one sees the Others as a threat
4. Everyone cares more about the throne than their impending doom

As @Tygett Lannister said; this isn't lotr where everyone will herald around some unknown bastard in the North. Honestly an ending as cliche as that would ruin everything about asoiaf and its reputation as an unconventional series.

20 hours ago, Megorova said:

Same reason that in GOT:

  Reveal hidden contents

Jon accepted title The King in The North (even though, as he himself said, he never wanted it), because someone had to lead people against Night's King.

He doesn't even care whether he will sit on Iron Throne afterwards, or not. All he wants to do, is defeat Night's King.

Practically the same reason why he became Lord Commander. He needed to have that status, for the greater good of others. Not Others others, just others

How many time must you be reminded that no one cares about that godawful show? Also he was made Lord Commander because he had the backing of the NW not because he needed the status for the greater good. 

12 hours ago, Livesundersink said:

Should Daenerys or Aegon take the throne, it may be more of the same unless of course someone can advise them to journey north and see things for themselves, ie Jorah or Tyrion perhaps.

Jon's known to be a member of House Stark, there's no proof he's a Targaryen so I doubt Dany and/or Aegon would care 

5 hours ago, Megorova said:

And Rhaegar could have married second time, and have two wives, same as his ancestor Aegon I, or he could have divorced with Elia, or annulled their marriage.

Only two kings have practiced polygamy; Aegon who was married before he converted, and Maegor the Cruel because none of his wives were giving him an heir. Not exactly the best justification for polygamy because Rhaegar's faith is the Seven and he has an heir.

I don't think divorce is a thing in Westeros and annulments are difficult to come by, Rhaegar has no precedent to annul his marriage nor would he have any reason to do so. Aegon's his PTWP whilst Jon was most likely meant to be a girl and girls don't need to be legitimate. 

Jon can't be king:

1. He has no proof he's a Targaryen
2. Aegon comes before him anyway
3. He's a bastard
4. He has 0 support
5. Why would he want to be king? 

[Pikachu101]

1 hour ago, Dragonsbone said:

Aegon I had two wifes. The septons did not liked it either.

Aegon had two wives before he became king and converted, Rhaegar has no authority to take a second wife.

1 hour ago, Dragonsbone said:

if Jon is the hero that saves the realm from the Others and gets his support by the whole Kingdom?

this isn't Lord of the Rings

1 hour ago, Dragonsbone said:

He does not look like a Targaryen??? What does that change please? Is he the only Targaryen with no silver hairs? Oh the irony! The series begun with a King who had a golden haired son. That son, even not being his real son, was crowned King. 

Jon can't prove he's a Targaryen, that's the point they were making. Joffrey didn't have to prove he was a Baratheon, it was Stannis who had to prove he wasn't. 

[The Sunland Lord]

12 hours ago, Livesundersink said:

Agreed, we see this when the Small Council reads the letter that Maester Aemon sent, Tywin refuses and says to tell them aid will not be sent until Janos Slynt is chosen as Lord Commander.

We see it again when Cersei is serving as Tommen's regent, another letter is read that reveals that Jon is the Lord Commander, not only does Cersei refuse to help but she actually plots to kill Jon for the sole crime of existing and being a member of House Stark.

Should Daenerys or Aegon take the throne, it may be more of the same unless of course someone can advise them to journey north and see things for themselves, ie Jorah or Tyrion perhaps.

This is perhaps the only scenario in which i can see Jon taking the throne at all if he has a claim to it, but i expect he will abdicate as soon as the war is over.

You can tell that it makes all the difference who sits on the IT, in fact.

 

[Alexis-something-Rose]

55 minutes ago, Pikachu101 said:

this isn't lotr where everyone will herald around some unknown bastard in the North. Honestly an ending as cliche as that would ruin everything about asoiaf and its reputation as an unconventional series.

Jon is not some unknown bastard in the north. As far as everyone knows, he is Ned Stark's son. He isn't some unknown quantity.

People know his name in King's Landing and in the Vale and the Riverlands because he was the Lord Commander of the Night's Watch and Ned's son. 

And if someone comes out and says oh well, he's actually the son of Rhaegar and Lyanna, he still would not be an unknown quantity or some unknown bastard. 

[Dragonsbone]

1 hour ago, Pikachu101 said:

this isn't Lord of the Rings

Thank you Captain Obvious. Thank you for your wisdom. But how do I, mortal being, decifer this piece of information? 

 

1 hour ago, Pikachu101 said:

Aegon had two wives before he became king and converted, Rhaegar has no authority to take a second wife.

That is not the point I tried to make. I meant by that that rules can be changed and are not writen on stone. Who the hell knows what will happen after the aftermath with the Others?

 

1 hour ago, Pikachu101 said:

Jon can't prove he's a Targaryen, that's the point they were making. Joffrey didn't have to prove he was a Baratheon, it was Stannis who had to prove he wasn't.

So having silver hair is a proof that he is a Targaryen? Boy, if only the Lyseni would knew. 

[theMADdestScientist_]

 

On 14/11/2017 at 3:47 AM, Barbrey Dustin said:

Rhaegar doesn't have the authority to grant himself an annulment

Tyrion married a peasant girl with the help of a drunken septon, his witnesses were pigs, and they did all this without Tywin's consent. This should tell you how a medieval society like Westeros works.

 

The real question is: If Rhaegar wants to annul his marriage, who will stop him from trying? one can't simply tell the crown prince what to do.

 

On 14/11/2017 at 3:47 AM, Barbrey Dustin said:

The kingship went directly from Aerys to Viserys and now to Daenerys.  Aerys to Viserys to Daenerys is the true line of succession.

The characters in the story seem to view this differently. Aerys himself is remembered as a madman, if he made Viserys his heir after Rhaegar died, not many cared about it. Jaime himself still regards Rhaegar as the rightful heir to the throne by the time he has his weirwood dream, and Jaime killed Aerys.

[kissdbyfire]

22 minutes ago, theMADdestScientist_ said:

The characters in the story seem to view this differently. Aerys himself is remembered as a madman, if he made Viserys his heir after Rhaegar died, not many cared about it. Jaime himself still regards Rhaegar as the rightful heir to the throne by the time he has his weirwood dream, and Jaime killed Aerys.

Not many cared and even fewer knew about it. 

Also, I don't get many of the arguments people are making here... Like, no one knows who Jon is (wrong), he doesn't look Targ (laughable b/c Baelor Breakspear, Rhaenys, etc), he can't prove he is Rhaegar and Lyanna's son, and so on. Some of these may be true at the mo, but things change, characters learn things, new characters appear, and shit happens. 

Hopefully Jon's arse and the IT will never ever meet, and I don't really think he'd want that gawd-awful chair anyway. But to state he has no claim is just silly stubborn hating on a character, and LMAO at that. 

[Pikachu101]

1 hour ago, Widow's Watch said:

People know his name in King's Landing and in the Vale and the Riverlands because he was the Lord Commander of the Night's Watch and Ned's son. 

That’s not the same thing as being a figure people would fight for. When I said Jon’s a nobody I meant he’s not noble, he’s not someone lords are fighting to put on the throne. Being a recognised bastard and being someone who is an actual contender for the throne are two very different things. 

1 hour ago, Widow's Watch said:

And if someone comes out and says oh well, he's actually the son of Rhaegar and Lyanna, he still would not be an unknown quantity or some unknown bastard. 

I don’t understand your point, no one would believe Jon is Rhaegar’s son. 

56 minutes ago, Dragonsbone said:

So having silver hair is a proof that he is a Targaryen? Boy, if only the Lyseni would knew. 

You’re missing my point; Aegon can physically prove he is the missing prince because just like the baby he has silver hair and purple eyes, that’s how Tyrion recognised him. But that’s isn’t all he has; people know a Prince Aegon existed, Targ supporter Jon Connington is backing him, Varys killed Kevan for him, and now Elia’s family are coming to meet him. He has a load of allies who can vouch for him to be the son of Rhaegar Targaryen and Elia Martell. 

Does Jon have this? Does he even want the crown and throne? The answer to both is no. 

24 minutes ago, theMADdestScientist_ said:

The real question is: If Rhaegar wants to annul his marriage, who will stop him from trying? one can't simply tell the crown prince what to do  

He’s not king and I doubt Aerys would let him marry into such a powerful family. Also contrary to popular belief you can’t just grant yourself an annulment regardless of your social position, especially when you have a son with your current wife. 

Besides why would Rhaegar seek an annulment in the first place? Aegon was his PTWP, there’s no logic in making him a bastard. 

[Alexis-something-Rose]

26 minutes ago, Pikachu101 said:

I don’t understand your point, no one would believe Jon is Rhaegar’s son.

I think Jon Connington would believe it. And that's one person who might have been present during the "abduction", might have known where everyone was holed up, might have put two and two together if he knows that Kingsguard were left behind at the ToJ, which he seems to know about. But he never hears about a baby. You don't think Barristan Selmy wondered why his sworn brothers were left behind in Dorne? What about the Dornish? Three Kingsguard dead far away from where all the war was happening. Wouldn't Doran Martell wonder why Arthur Dayne died in Dorne instead of dying on the Trident? That might have raised some eyebrows. 

But that's just my line of thinking.

[Megorova]

There is definitely a way for Rhaegar to annul his marriage.

When Crown Prince Duncan married with Jenny, government wanted him to ditch her, and after that he could have legally married with someone else. Because they didn't just wanted him to ditch Jenny, just for the sake of it, they wanted him to marry with someone who is more fitting to become a future Queen of 7K.

There was a legal basis for separation of Duncan and Jenny, even though their marriage was already consummated. Rhaegar could have used something similar, for his separation with Elia.

Tyrion Lannister also was already married once. Nevertheless he married with Sansa. What happened with his first wife? Was their marriage annulled, or did they divorced? What legal basis did Tyrion used for their separation?

Actually I doubt that he ever did anything with legal status of his first marriage. I think he did nothing. And yet he married with Sansa. Which means that legally he has two wives.

[Lyanna<3Rhaegar]

2 hours ago, Pikachu101 said:

I don’t understand your point, no one would believe Jon is Rhaegar’s son. 

I disagree. There are plenty of people that will believe it. For starters for Jon to find out about it there will have to be some sort of proof. Secondly the entire realm knows the story of Rhaegar "kidnapping" Lyanna. 

 

2 hours ago, Pikachu101 said:

You’re missing my point; Aegon can physically prove he is the missing prince because just like the baby he has silver hair and purple eyes, that’s how Tyrion recognised him. But that’s isn’t all he has; people know a Prince Aegon existed, Targ supporter Jon Connington is backing him, Varys killed Kevan for him, and now Elia’s family are coming to meet him. He has a load of allies who can vouch for him to be the son of Rhaegar Targaryen and Elia Martell. 

Does Jon have this? Does he even want the crown and throne? The answer to both is no. 

Just as people know of Rhaegar & Lyanna. How he named her QoL&B over his wife. Whatever proof is used to convince Jon himself he is the son of Rhaegar & Lyanna will be suffice for those that matter. I agree Jon doesn't want the throne but that doesn't mean he can't prove he is the son of R&L

 

2 hours ago, Pikachu101 said:

He’s not king and I doubt Aerys would let him marry into such a powerful family. Also contrary to popular belief you can’t just grant yourself an annulment regardless of your social position, especially when you have a son with your current wife. 

Besides why would Rhaegar seek an annulment in the first place? Aegon was his PTWP, there’s no logic in making him a bastard. 

How do you know? We don't really have any good annullment stories to compare it to but I think it's suffice to say Rhaegar can marry without Aerys' approval so I'm not sure what your point is there. 

The fact of the matter is we don't know the annullment process in Westeros or the divorce process. We don't really know who needs be involved & what grounds it can be granted on. One thing seems certain though: you don't have to have the King's permission. 

Let's say to have an annullment performed one would need a septon. What septon would deny the Crown Prince an annullment even if he had no grounds on which to request one, let alone if he did. 

I think the rules of annullment, divorce, polygamy, & setting your wife aside will be much the same as every other rule in Westeros: ambiguous, bendable, & even breakable if you have the right last name - which obviously Rhaegar did. 

As to why Rhaegar would seek an annullment in the first place, I'm not positive he did, only that he could have. There was obviously some reason Rhaegar thought he needed to couple with Lyanna whether or not Aegon is tPTwP. 

[Reekazoid]

5 hours ago, Bael's Bastard said:

 Descendants of old Valyria might be everywhere, but I see no reason to think that the blood of dragon lord families is interchangeable when it comes to each family's dragons. The only dragons over the last four centuries have been Targaryen dragons, and their seed, legit or otherwise, is mostly in Westeros.

Were Dany's dragon eggs explicitly Targaryen dragon eggs, or are we assuming that they are because the resulting hatchlings bonded with Daenerys Targaryen?

Did Iliryo specifically buy them from someone that got them from a Targaryen cache on Dragonstone? 

I've  not run a search but I don't recall anything in the text supporting that assumption.

However, Iliryo had access to the markets of the Free Cities and the economic and political muscle to find what he needed, even priceless antiquities like dragon eggs.

Before the Doom there were dragons all over the place in Essos, and even after the Conquest there were wild dragons in the world.

Personally I think Dany ended up with generic non-trademarked "dragon eggs", not the officially-licensed  brand name Targaryen Dragon Eggs(tm).

Did I miss something somewhere about dragon genetics being tied to dragon rider genetics?

 

 

 

 

[Hodor the Articulate]

9 hours ago, Sigella said:

Nope, not really. If we are talking a great council (which I figure it would be) no lord paramount could hope to go against all the rest in practicality. The Queen who never was had the Velaryon fleet and more gold than any lord (greatest naval power and the richer than the Lannisters back then) and she was a dragon rider too. And they passed her over.

"no lord paramount could hope to go against all the rest in practicality" - well, isn't that exactly what I said? Once the Great Council makes a decision, enough lords will support that, and any dissenters also fall in line because they'd have little chance of winning a war against the rest.

9 hours ago, Sigella said:

Yeah I'm not saying Viserys has no claim. Just that Rhaenys/Aegon/legit Jon has a better one. 

I think the legitimacy of claims is more than just looking at birth order, though that is the first thing people will consider. The King's explicitly chosen heir can be just as important (just look at the support claimants like Rhaenerya and Daemon have mustered through just implicit choice), and Aerys wanted Viserys to succeed him. There isn't any cut and dry answer because Westeros doesn't seem to have concrete laws regarding this.

Right now, Dany still has the best claim because she's the only one who's Targ identity isn't in question. Of course, that could change if enough people start backing Aegon. Jon... I can't see why anyone would believe he's got a bit of dragon in him, or why they'd care.

[Hodor the Articulate]

3 hours ago, theMADdestScientist_ said:

Tyrion married a peasant girl with the help of a drunken septon, his witnesses were pigs, and they did all this without Tywin's consent. This should tell you how a medieval society like Westeros works.

Yeah, and Tywin quite easily had that marriage annulled.

59 minutes ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

How do you know? We don't really have any good annullment stories to compare it to but I think it's suffice to say Rhaegar can marry without Aerys' approval so I'm not sure what your point is there. 

The fact of the matter is we don't know the annullment process in Westeros or the divorce process. We don't really know who needs be involved & what grounds it can be granted on. One thing seems certain though: you don't have to have the King's permission. 

Let's say to have an annullment performed one would need a septon. What septon would deny the Crown Prince an annullment even if he had no grounds on which to request one, let alone if he did. 

I think the rules of annullment, divorce, polygamy, & setting your wife aside will be much the same as every other rule in Westeros: ambiguous, bendable, & even breakable if you have the right last name - which obviously Rhaegar did. 

As to why Rhaegar would seek an annullment in the first place, I'm not positive he did, only that he could have. There was obviously some reason Rhaegar thought he needed to couple with Lyanna whether or not Aegon is tPTwP. 

We have enough annulments, plus real life history, to have a fairly good idea of what might be necessary for annulments and divorces. Plus, just plain common sense. It would take something like non-consummation or adultery or not being able to produce heirs, I would think. It wouldn't be as easy as "I like this other person better than you" because the spouse's family, inheritance issues, the church, etc. Plus, noble marriages aren't just marriages, they're political alliances.

And I think you're overstating a crown prince's power. He could bribe or bully a septon into performing an annulment or marriage or whatever, but that doesn't mean the rest of the realm would recognise it. A King could just as easily dismiss the act as unlawful. So yes, laws and precedents can be broken, but you'd need political and military backing for it to stick.

[Lyanna<3Rhaegar]

16 minutes ago, Hodor the Articulate said:

Yeah, and Tywin quite easily had that marriage annulled.

We have enough annulments, plus real life history, to have a fairly good idea of what might be necessary for annulments and divorces. Plus, just plain common sense. It would take something like non-consummation or adultery or not being able to produce heirs, I would think. It wouldn't be as easy as "I like this other person better than you" because the spouse's family, inheritance issues, the church, etc. Plus, noble marriages aren't just marriages, they're political alliances.

And I think you're overstating a crown prince's power. He could bribe or bully a septon into performing an annulment or marriage or whatever, but that doesn't mean the rest of the realm would recognise it. A King could just as easily dismiss the act as unlawful. So yes, laws and precedents can be broken, but you'd need political and military backing for it to stick.

What annullments do we have? If we have so many we should know the process & who &/what need be involved. I'm not saying it wouldn't take something like the things you stated, I believe it probably would. My point was Aerys need not be involved at all. He was cruel & mad & the realm knew it. They had every reason to believe Rhaegar would be King soon enough & therefore would not deny his annullment. 

Rhaegar did have political & military backing. Had he won at the Trident (and we know he thought he would) there's very good reason to believe he planned on over throwing his father in some manner - making himself King. Even if Jaime hadn't killed Aerys, his word would carry very little weight at that point. 

At any rate my point was it is absolutely possible for Rhaegar to have had an annullment given the right circumstances. Not to argue he could just say "I like this other person better than you" but to counter the people saying there is no possible way he could have. We don't know the rules for an annullment in Westeros & thus can't say with any certainty that option was not available to Rhaegar. 

[Pikachu101]

8 hours ago, Widow's Watch said:

I think Jon Connington would believe it.

Why would he? Besides recognising Jon would be a threat to Aegon, especially if you turn out to be right and Rhaegar did annul his marriage to Elia thus making Aegon a bastard. 

7 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

I disagree. There are plenty of people that will believe it. For starters for Jon to find out about it there will have to be some sort of proof. Secondly the entire realm knows the story of Rhaegar "kidnapping" Lyanna. 

That doesn't mean Jon can prove he's the child of Rhaegar and Lyanna. Even if for some crazy reason people believe Jon is Rhaegar's son that doesn't mean he has proof that he's legitimate, any possible witnesses to Rhaegar and Lyanna's "marriage" are dead. 

7 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

Just as people know of Rhaegar & Lyanna. How he named her QoL&B over his wife. Whatever proof is used to convince Jon himself he is the son of Rhaegar & Lyanna will be suffice for those that matter.

Kidnapping Lyanna or making her his mistress isn't sufficent proof that Jon is the product of this union, nor does it prove that he's legitimate. 

7 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

but that doesn't mean he can't prove he is the son of R&L

Then why would Jon even want to reveal his true parentage? I can see him believing Bran and Howland Reed, but that doesn't mean he's going to go out of his way to convinve the rest of Westeros.

7 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

We don't really have any good annullment stories to compare it to but I think it's suffice to say Rhaegar can marry without Aerys' approval so I'm not sure what your point is there. 

Getting married and having that marriage legally recognised are complteley different issues.

7 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

The fact of the matter is we don't know the annullment process in Westeros or the divorce process. We don't really know who needs be involved & what grounds it can be granted on.

Actually we do, according to the official asoiaf wiki the Faith of the Seven only grant annulments if the marriage was never consumated which was why Tywin was so desperate to make Tyrion bed Sansa. 

7 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

What septon would deny the Crown Prince an annullment

Because the Crown Prince can't do as he pleases when it comes to something as serious as marriage, especially when said marriage produced a son. 

7 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

I think the rules of annullment, divorce, polygamy, & setting your wife aside will be much the same as every other rule in Westeros: ambiguous, bendable, & even breakable if you have the right last name - which obviously Rhaegar did. 

It's not that simple, Elia gave Rhaegar a son he can't just set her aside and the fact that this has never happened before proves that. Henry VIII was the King of England but he still couldn't get a divorce even though Catherine of Aragon only had a daughter, divorce and annulments aren't easy especially when your wife is nobility. 

7 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

There was obviously some reason Rhaegar thought he needed to couple with Lyanna whether or not Aegon is tPTwP. 

You don't have to marry someone to get a baby out of them, Aegon was going to be think PTWP who defeated the Others there's no way Rhaegar would allow for his legitimacy to be questioned. 

9 hours ago, Megorova said:

There was a legal basis for separation of Duncan and Jenny, even though their marriage was already consummated. Rhaegar could have used something similar, for his separation with Elia.

Jenny, just like Tysha, was a peasant girl with no connections and no family to defend and protect her. Elia's the exact opposite; she's a princess in her own right, her marriage was arranged and acknowledged by the king, and she gave birth to two children who were recognised as Targaryen Royalty. You can't compare apples and oranges, the fact is Rhaegar has no basis to annul his marriage nor would he have any reason to do so. 

I blame that awful show for this to even be a possibility.