Jump to content

Jon is not in the line of succession


Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, Bowen 747 said:

Rhaegar's family was disinherited.  Even his legit children lost their claims. 

Nope. Aerys proclaiming Viserys as his heir doesn't automatically mean that Rhaegar's children were disinherited, only that Aerys pushed his preference for Viserys over the normal succession.

 

On the whole, it seems that lots of people are getting really desperate not to see Jon on the IT. I, for one, don't want him sitting the ugly chair, either, but if you want to bust the hidden prince trope, you need, you know, a hidden prince. As in, legitimate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Sigella said:

No, maternity is rarely an issue. :D

My point was that being a dragonrider doesnt prove anything, really.

That depends. People can see it as a sign, and have done so in the past. When Rhaenyra's Velaryon sons - and Prince Aenys before them - became dragonriders this was seen as a sign that they were 'true Targaryens' and the rumors about their illegitimate birth lost credibility (without going away completely in the case of Rhaenyra's sons).

Vice versa, it was seen as an ill omen that no dragon hatched from Prince Viserys' egg, never mind the fact that he was definitely a trueborn son of Rhaenyra and Daemon.

However, in light of the fact that Jon Snow may become known as a skinchanger as well as the chances that Dany's dragons might get a succession of very odd riders - Tyrion, Brown Ben Plumm, Victarion, Euron, Aegon, etc. - Jon Snow claiming one of them in the end might not exactly convince anyone that he must be a legitimate Targaryen prince.

In addition, we do know that the Two Betrayers Ulf and Hugh were not suddenly universally accepted as 'Targaryens' simply because they claimed two of the largest dragons alive. They were bastards and commoners who tried to rise far too high, and that's how the noblemen around them saw them. That's why they banded together to kill them. 

This means dragons can you give power and prestige but if you lack the right looks, manners, upbringing, or name you still won't be accepted as a proper dragon among dragons.

If Jon Snow doesn't hook up/is accepted by other members of House Targaryen as a Targaryen nobody will see him that way - most likely not even he himself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

That depends. People can see it as a sign, and have done so in the past. When Rhaenyra's Velaryon sons - and Prince Aenys before them - became dragonriders this was seen as a sign that they were 'true Targaryens' and the rumors about their illegitimate birth lost credibility (without going away completely in the case of Rhaenyra's sons).

Vice versa, it was seen as an ill omen that no dragon hatched from Prince Viserys' egg, never mind the fact that he was definitely a trueborn son of Rhaenyra and Daemon.

However, in light of the fact that Jon Snow may become known as a skinchanger as well as the chances that Dany's dragons might get a succession of very odd riders - Tyrion, Brown Ben Plumm, Victarion, Euron, Aegon, etc. - Jon Snow claiming one of them in the end might not exactly convince anyone that he must be a legitimate Targaryen prince.

In addition, we do know that the Two Betrayers Ulf and Hugh were not suddenly universally accepted as 'Targaryens' simply because they claimed two of the largest dragons alive. They were bastards and commoners who tried to rise far too high, and that's how the noblemen around them saw them. That's why they banded together to kill them. 

This means dragons can you give power and prestige but if you lack the right looks, manners, upbringing, or name you still won't be accepted as a proper dragon among dragons.

If Jon Snow doesn't hook up/is accepted by other members of House Targaryen as a Targaryen nobody will see him that way - most likely not even he himself.

Being a dragonrider makes other people scared of you, so of course it curbs criticism some.

 

If Dany takes Westeros by conquest it won't matter - her husband will be the king (not Hizdar! :D)

 

The two betrayers was never called Targs iirc. Ulf the White and Hugh Hammer was their names after legitimisation, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think any of this matters, who is a bastard, who falls in the succession line or outside of it, if the person is a man or a woman.

I agree with Mormont that it doesn't matter who sits the throne when dead men come calling. Whoever is on the throne between the end of ADWD and the start of the Long Night will not matter. And things might change drastically in Westeros after the ice zombie apocalypse. Maybe they won't care who is a bastard, a fake Targaryen or a woman anymore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Sigella said:

Being a dragonrider makes other people scared of you, so of course it curbs criticism some.

It can help, but it is just one feature. Maegor the Cruel rode the biggest dragon alive but that made him the most popular king of the Targaryen dynasty, nor did it prevent his subjects from constantly rebelling against him, until he was eventually overthrown.

10 minutes ago, Sigella said:

If Dany takes Westeros by conquest it won't matter - her husband will be the king (not Hizdar! :D)

That is a separate matter. A king of queen conquering Westeros could make a peasant his or her consort. Especially if he or she used dragons and a vast army to conquer Westeros and destroy any resistance.

10 minutes ago, Sigella said:

The two betrayers was never called Targs iirc. Ulf the White and Hugh Hammer was their names after legitimisation, right?

They were never legitimized. They were knighted and promised lordships later on. But their examples show that dudes claiming a dragon who are very likely descended from some Targaryen - or even multiple Targaryens (they could have more than just one Targaryen bastards among their ancestors) - are not suddenly seen as 'hidden princes' because of that fact.

And we have one son of Rhaegar already with Aegon. Is is very likely that people will believe that Jon is another such, especially if Dany's dragons are also going to be claimed by the likes of Brown Ben Plumm, Victarion, Tyrion, Euron, etc.?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, kissdbyfire said:

Well, since Martin has said Jon will learn who his parents were it's safe to say at least one character will know for sure.

I think Bran and Howland will tell him, but that’s not same as proving it to the realm he’s a Targ or proving Rhaegar married Lyanna. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Pikachu101 said:

The characters can’t prove Jon’s parentage, if R+L=J is true then it will be for the readers. Also OP’s right, Jon’s a bastard so has no right to the throne. 

Dragons can prove that Jon is a Targaryen. Furthermore Howland Reed also knows who are Jon's real parents. Not to mention that Bran can see the past, and give sufficient evidences to those who will be doubting.

Also there's a possibility that Jon is not a bastard. And there's a lot of options how that can be possible. For example:

1. Rhaegar married with Lyanna. Too. He had two wives, same as Aegon I. Thus all his children were legitimate.

2. Rhaegar annulled his marriage with Elia, or divorced with her. Either their children became bastards, or they remained as legitimate. Though Jon is also legitimate.

3. Rhaegar didn't married with Lyanna, though it is known that prior his death he went from Dorne to King's Landing. Most likely after he was away for nearly a year, and his actions caused Robert's rebellion, it's obvious that when Aerys and Rhaegar finally met again, Rhaegar had to explain to his father what actually happened between him and Lyanna, and where he was for all this time. If he convinced Aerys that his unborn grandchild is a Prince that was promised, then it's very likely that Aerys legitimised Lyanna's unborn child as Targaryen. As a King, he can do this.

Also he and his sister Rhaella agreed to marry with each other, only because their father believed in the prophecy. And both of them got along with it, and did married, even though they didn't liked each other. They could have avoided it, in same manner as their parents managed to get away from unwanted engagements. One of them, either Aerys or Rhaella, could have escaped from home, and married with someone else, thus making marriage between the two of them impossible. Nevertheless they did married, and suffered thru 20+ years of unhappy life together, and all for the sake of the prophecy.

So if Rhaegar convinced Aerys that Lyanna's baby is either the Prince that was promised, or third head of a dragon, then Aerys legitimised Lyanna's baby, even prior it was born. There could be documentated evidences of this. For example Varys can have them. Or maybe Pycelle had them. Or this document is in Citadel. And maesters are not aware of this document and its contents, because they received this document, delivered from King's Landing by messenger, already after Aerys' death. So they weren't even interested in what their deceased King has wrote to them. Or someone did read it, but information in that document were concidered by them as being irrelevand, based on the fact that Aerys is dead, and new King is Robert Baratheon, thus it doesn't matter anymore what kind of decree Aerys has wrote. 

4. Or even if not for the sake of the prophecy, Rhaegar could have convinced Aerys to legitimise his unborn baby, as a condition for Rhaegar to fight for Aerys in rebellion, and to lead Targaryens troops to Trident.

 

If Jon is not a bastard, then he is heir of Targaryens, and possible candidate to be ruler of 7K. Even if he is a bastard, there is a possibility that 7K's government (Citadel, maesters, Small Councill, High Septon, Rulers of Seven Kingdoms, Wardens of Westeros) can legitimise him.

Also it's possible that after Rhaegar's death, Aerys disinherited his Dornish children, and removed them from succession line. Maybe Aerys annulled Rhaegar's marriage with Elia, after Rhaegar's death, and thus their children became bastards. According to modern civil and Catholic church laws, even if marriage is annulled, the children from that marriage still remain being legitimate. But it wasn't like this, in medieval times. In some cases annullment of marriage, made children bastards. So either Rhaegar himself made Aegon Martell to become illegitimate, or it was done by Aerys. Maybe there are people still alive who knows about this. Though so far it wasn't mentioned anywhere by them, because so far it wasn't relevant. Maybe Dany knows, or even has documented evidences, that Elia's children became illegitimate. Thus even if Young Griff is not an impostor, and really is son of Rhaegar and his wife Elia, he doesn't have a right to become King of 7K, because he was removed from succession line.

Or Young Griff is an impostor. Does even Jon Con knows for sure, that that baby was Rhaegar's son Aegon? Maybe he's fake, and it is all just part of Varys' plot. And similarity between Rhaegar and fake Aegon could be explained by him being Valyrian descendant. He could be one of Blackfyres, or even from some other Valyrian family. Because Aerys has sent his cousin Steffon Baratheon to Essos, to look for a fiancee with Valyrian blood. Thus there were other Valyrian families still living in Essos. So Varys found one of them, and took from them a blond and blue-eyed boy, that resembeled Rhaegar when he was a child. And everything alse is just Jon Con's wishtful thinking. He was told that the baby is Rhaegar's son Aegon, and he believed it. And later he rased him on stories about Rhaegar, and thought that the boy is just like his father, looks like him and has similar personality. But that all is just an illusion, wishtful thinking and condition of environment in which the boy grew up. Though could be that both of them - Jon Con and Fake Aegon - think that he is really son of Rhaegar, and thus rightful heir of Iron Throne.

 

If Jon is not a bastard, and Young Griff is a fake, then Jon is first in succession line, even prior Dany. Thus he is rightful King of 7K.

If Young Griff is really son of Rhaegar, he could die even before getting to King's Landing. Or he can get there, and Cersei will kill him with wildfire. Thus even though he is first son of Crown Prince, after he will be dead, next in line is Jon, and not Dany. Because even if Aerys disinherited Elia's children, doesn't mean that he also disinherited Lyanna's child.

1 hour ago, Pikachu101 said:

I think Bran and Howland will tell him, but that’s not same as proving it to the realm he’s a Targ or proving Rhaegar married Lyanna. 

There could be documents in Citadel that proves Jon's legitimate status. Or maybe those documents were at Tower of Joy, and they were brought to Winterfell together with baby Jon. So maybe Jon will find them, if he will be revived, and will go to Winterfell. Maybe Bran knows where those documents are, or maybe they are kept by Howland Reed.

 

Jon Con has grey scale. Because of climate change (from more dry environment of Essos, to colder climate of Westeros. Maybe maesters discovered that in dry climate the sickness is progressing slower, and that's one of the reasons why people with grey scale from Westeros are exiled to ruings of Valyria. In that environment they could live longer, than in Westeros), the illness could drastically progress. Thus he will go to Citadel to look for a cure there. And he will find there documents that Rhaegar has married with Lyanna Stark. So he will realise that the Bastard of Winterfell is actually Rhaegar's child. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

It can help, but it is just one feature. Maegor the Cruel rode the biggest dragon alive but that made him the most popular king of the Targaryen dynasty, nor did it prevent his subjects from constantly rebelling against him, until he was eventually overthrown.

That is a separate matter. A king of queen conquering Westeros could make a peasant his or her consort. Especially if he or she used dragons and a vast army to conquer Westeros and destroy any resistance.

They were never legitimized. They were knighted and promised lordships later on. But their examples show that dudes claiming a dragon who are very likely descended from some Targaryen - or even multiple Targaryens (they could have more than just one Targaryen bastards among their ancestors) - are not suddenly seen as 'hidden princes' because of that fact.

And we have one son of Rhaegar already with Aegon. Is is very likely that people will believe that Jon is another such, especially if Dany's dragons are also going to be claimed by the likes of Brown Ben Plumm, Victarion, Tyrion, Euron, etc.?

Exactly, people might not dare call you stuff to your face but they might still cut your throat when you sleep - if you give them enough reason to. 

 

A smart conqeress tries to win all nobility she can on the other hand. Since Dany had the sense to marry Hizdar, her not doing the same move in Westeros would be weird. 

 

Sorry I must have confused them with the dragonseed-turned-heir-Velaryon dude ("Laenor's" bastard). But I reason exactly the same on the rest.

 

I have a loose theory on which characters will be dragon riders and its a very short list. Tyrion, Vic and Euron aren't on it. And personally I think that Aegon won't live long enough to ride one either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Widow's Watch said:

I don't think any of this matters, who is a bastard, who falls in the succession line or outside of it, if the person is a man or a woman.

I agree with Mormont that it doesn't matter who sits the throne when dead men come calling. Whoever is on the throne between the end of ADWD and the start of the Long Night will not matter. And things might change drastically in Westeros after the ice zombie apocalypse. Maybe they won't care who is a bastard, a fake Targaryen or a woman anymore.

I think it will matter who sits on the Throne. 

It's different whether there's Jon, Daenerys, Cersei, Stannis, or anyone else. Because each of them would have a different approach. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Sigella said:

Being a dragonrider makes other people scared of you, so of course it curbs criticism some.

 

If Dany takes Westeros by conquest it won't matter - her husband will be the king (not Hizdar! :D)

 

The two betrayers was never called Targs iirc. Ulf the White and Hugh Hammer was their names after legitimisation, right?

Having a dragon does make a difference in how people react to your opinions.  The dragon can prove that one has Valyrian Dragonlord blood.  Nettles was not Targaryen but she may have had a drop of Valyrian blood from a distant ancestor who was Dragonlord who just happened to have had an illegit.

If and when Dany takes Westeros by conquest all of this discussion of the line of succession should not matter.  She gets to decide and everything starts with a clean slate.   Her husband will be consort but Dany will rule.  Depending on who he is, he might be this generation's Daemon Targaryen.   

Yes, those two dragon riders or seeds were not Targaryens.  They may have had a drop of blood from one of the forty families that ruled Valyria.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Megorova said:

Dragons can prove that Jon is a Targaryen. Furthermore Howland Reed also knows who are Jon's real parents. Not to mention that Bran can see the past, and give sufficient evidences to those who will be doubting.

Also there's a possibility that Jon is not a bastard. And there's a lot of options how that can be possible. For example:

1. Rhaegar married with Lyanna. Too. He had two wives, same as Aegon I. Thus all his children were legitimate.

2. Rhaegar annulled his marriage with Elia, or divorced with her. Either their children became bastards, or they remained as legitimate. Though Jon is also legitimate.

3. Rhaegar didn't married with Lyanna, though it is known that prior his death he went from Dorne to King's Landing. Most likely after he was away for nearly a year, and his actions caused Robert's rebellion, it's obvious that when Aerys and Rhaegar finally met again, Rhaegar had to explain to his father what actually happened between him and Lyanna, and where he was for all this time. If he convinced Aerys that his unborn grandchild is a Prince that was promised, then it's very likely that Aerys legitimised Lyanna's unborn child as Targaryen. As a King, he can do this.

Also he and his sister Rhaella agreed to marry with each other, only because their father believed in the prophecy. And both of them got along with it, and did married, even though they didn't liked each other. They could have avoided it, in same manner as their parents managed to get away from unwanted engagements. One of them, either Aerys or Rhaella, could have escaped from home, and married with someone else, thus making marriage between the two of them impossible. Nevertheless they did married, and suffered thru 20+ years of unhappy life together, and all for the sake of the prophecy.

So if Rhaegar convinced Aerys that Lyanna's baby is either the Prince that was promised, or third head of a dragon, then Aerys legitimised Lyanna's baby, even prior it was born. There could be documentated evidences of this. For example Varys can have them. Or maybe Pycelle had them. Or this document is in Citadel. And maesters are not aware of this document and its contents, because they received this document, delivered from King's Landing by messenger, already after Aerys' death. So they weren't even interested in what their deceased King has wrote to them. Or someone did read it, but information in that document were concidered by them as being irrelevand, based on the fact that Aerys is dead, and new King is Robert Baratheon, thus it doesn't matter anymore what kind of decree Aerys has wrote. 

4. Or even if not for the sake of the prophecy, Rhaegar could have convinced Aerys to legitimise his unborn baby, as a condition for Rhaegar to fight for Aerys in rebellion, and to lead Targaryens troops to Trident.

 

If Jon is not a bastard, then he is heir of Targaryens, and possible candidate to be ruler of 7K. Even if he is a bastard, there is a possibility that 7K's government (Citadel, maesters, Small Councill, High Septon, Rulers of Seven Kingdoms, Wardens of Westeros) can legitimise him.

Also it's possible that after Rhaegar's death, Aerys disinherited his Dornish children, and removed them from succession line. Maybe Aerys annulled Rhaegar's marriage with Elia, after Rhaegar's death, and thus their children became bastards. According to modern civil and Catholic church laws, even if marriage is annulled, the children from that marriage still remain being legitimate. But it wasn't like this, in medieval times. In some cases annullment of marriage, made children bastards. So either Rhaegar himself made Aegon Martell to become illegitimate, or it was done by Aerys. Maybe there are people still alive who knows about this. Though so far it wasn't mentioned anywhere by them, because so far it wasn't relevant. Maybe Dany knows, or even has documented evidences, that Elia's children became illegitimate. Thus even if Young Griff is not an impostor, and really is son of Rhaegar and his wife Elia, he doesn't have a right to become King of 7K, because he was removed from succession line.

Or Young Griff is an impostor. Does even Jon Con knows for sure, that that baby was Rhaegar's son Aegon? Maybe he's fake, and it is all just part of Varys' plot. And similarity between Rhaegar and fake Aegon could be explained by him being Valyrian descendant. He could be one of Blackfyres, or even from some other Valyrian family. Because Aerys has sent his cousin Steffon Baratheon to Essos, to look for a fiancee with Valyrian blood. Thus there were other Valyrian families still living in Essos. So Varys found one of them, and took from them a blond and blue-eyed boy, that resembeled Rhaegar when he was a child. And everything alse is just Jon Con's wishtful thinking. He was told that the baby is Rhaegar's son Aegon, and he believed it. And later he rased him on stories about Rhaegar, and thought that the boy is just like his father, looks like him and has similar personality. But that all is just an illusion, wishtful thinking and condition of environment in which the boy grew up. Though could be that both of them - Jon Con and Fake Aegon - think that he is really son of Rhaegar, and thus rightful heir of Iron Throne.

 

If Jon is not a bastard, and Young Griff is a fake, then Jon is first in succession line, even prior Dany. Thus he is rightful King of 7K.

If Young Griff is really son of Rhaegar, he could die even before getting to King's Landing. Or he can get there, and Cersei will kill him with wildfire. Thus even though he is first son of Crown Prince, after he will be dead, next in line is Jon, and not Dany. Because even if Aerys disinherited Elia's children, doesn't mean that he also disinherited Lyanna's child.

There could be documents in Citadel that proves Jon's legitimate status. Or maybe those documents were at Tower of Joy, and they were brought to Winterfell together with baby Jon. So maybe Jon will find them, if he will be revived, and will go to Winterfell. Maybe Bran knows where those documents are, or maybe they are kept by Howland Reed.

 

Jon Con has grey scale. Because of climate change (from more dry environment of Essos, to colder climate of Westeros. Maybe maesters discovered that in dry climate the sickness is progressing slower, and that's one of the reasons why people with grey scale from Westeros are exiled to ruings of Valyria. In that environment they could live longer, than in Westeros), the illness could drastically progress. Thus he will go to Citadel to look for a cure there. And he will find there documents that Rhaegar has married with Lyanna Stark. So he will realise that the Bastard of Winterfell is actually Rhaegar's child. 

No.  Dragons do not prove that one is a Targaryen.  Only that someone has an ancestor from one of the forty families who ruled Valyria.  Dragons lend power and prestige.  Dragons do not prove that someone is a Targaryen.  

The legitimacy of Aegon/Young Griffin and Jon are mutually exclusive.  The benefit of the doubt goes to Aegon because Rhaegar and Elia were actually married and that marriage was consummated.  Aegon looks the part.  

Aerys disinherited Rhaegar's children, present and future, when he passed the line of succession to Prince Viserys.  And it would make sense that he would want to do this if RLJ is true.  Aerys would do everything in his power to prevent a half Stark from inheriting his throne.  Rhaegar's children really have no place in the line of succession.  

Rhaegar could not and cannot legally marry Lyanna.  Rhaegar was already married.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Widowmaker 811 said:

Rhaegar's children really have no place in the line of succession.  

The decree of a dead king can be ignored and dismissed, no one cared that Viserys made Rhaenyra his heir nor did anyone care that Robert made Ned Joffrey's guardian. I wouldn't dismiss Aegon just yet, if Dany were to overthrow him it would because he's a fake not because her insane father disinherited the brother she loves so much. 

35 minutes ago, Widowmaker 811 said:

Rhaegar could not and cannot legally marry Lyanna.  Rhaegar was already married.  

:agree:

Even if Rhaegar and Lyanna did "marry" it's not legitimate:

  1. Targaryen polygamy has only been done twice: Aegon was married before he converted, and Maegor's hated not exactly the best examples of why it should be allowed
  2. There are no living witnesses, Elizabeth Woodville's children were disinherited because she had a secret marriage same will happen with Jon if he tries to stake a claim
  3. I highly doubt Ned kept any evidence that Jon was Rhaegar's son, his word would have been enough 

Also this thread is under the impression that Jon would even want to stake a claim to the throne, can anyone give me a reason why he would? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Widowmaker 811 said:

Having a dragon does make a difference in how people react to your opinions.  The dragon can prove that one has Valyrian Dragonlord blood.  Nettles was not Targaryen but she may have had a drop of Valyrian blood from a distant ancestor who was Dragonlord who just happened to have had an illegit.

If and when Dany takes Westeros by conquest all of this discussion of the line of succession should not matter.  She gets to decide and everything starts with a clean slate.   Her husband will be consort but Dany will rule.  Depending on who he is, he might be this generation's Daemon Targaryen.   

Yes, those two dragon riders or seeds were not Targaryens.  They may have had a drop of blood from one of the forty families that ruled Valyria.  

As I said before, being a dragonrider makes people scared of you and fear changes a lot.

Not sure even that is a proven thing. Doesnt the histories have non-valyrian dragon riders? Im far from certain.

Im not sure about that either. Happiness for Dany is a house with a red door, not the Red Keep. In Dance she seems pretty sick of ruling, if she marries someone competent I wouldnt rule it out for her to focus on motherhood or cute charities.

Call it a drop of blood of the dragon and Im with you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Megorova said:

If Jon is not a bastard, then he is heir of Targaryens, and possible candidate to be ruler of 7K. Even if he is a bastard, there is a possibility that 7K's government (Citadel, maesters, Small Councill, High Septon, Rulers of Seven Kingdoms, Wardens of Westeros) can legitimise him.

Let's assume we believe these fanboi theories how Jon is legitimate son of Rhaegar and Lyanna and that Aegon is a fake and we strictly follow laws of succession with having absolute knowledge.

Line of succession before battle of Trident:

1. Rhaegar

2. Aegon

3. Rhaenys

4. Viserys

5. Rhaella

6. Baratheons

Rhaegar dies in battle of Trident and Aegon takes his place as heir. Than Aerys names Viserys heir to the throne and is killed by Jamie, if that is ignored and we still follow laws of succession Aegon becomes King. Aegon and Rhaenys are killed by Mountain and Viserys is now King without doubt. Jon is born and becomes heir to Iron Throne. Rhaella dies while giving birth to Dany. Before Jon takes black he is technically heir for ~13 years. Jon takes black and with this act gives up his claim and Dany becomes heir. Viserys dies and crown passes to Dany. Jon is killed. If you believe he is no longer member of Night's watch after being resurrected (because that is a sure thing apparently) he doesn't have his claim back because he is considered a new person, resurrected people are not really human and I don't think non-humans are in line of succession. So current line of succession is:

1. Stannis Baratheon

2. Shireen Baratheon

3. Blackfyres

And this is ignoring facts secret marriages are illegal and that High Septon would not annul Rhaegar's completely fine marriage (yes Elia is infertile but she has 2 healthy children). Polygamy is possible but it would be a big scandal and religion would protest in public and would only agree to it after being forced. If any legitimization was done nobody knows (Howland can't know even if he did he is a frogeater nobody cares about), while it is known Viserys was named heir by Aerys. Also there is no Northern Gods in South so Bran can't know shit and he is Beyond the Wall and will probably stay there. Jon can only become King by marrying a Queen (which makes him king in name only) or by being some hero that will save the world from evil White Walkers which we know is so Martin-like.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Widowmaker 811 said:

No.  Dragons do not prove that one is a Targaryen.  Only that someone has an ancestor from one of the forty families who ruled Valyria.  Dragons lend power and prestige.  Dragons do not prove that someone is a Targaryen.  

In Jon's case dragons do prove that he is Targaryen.

To anyone who isn't blind, it is obvious that Jon is half-Stark. Nobody ever doubted Ned's claim that Jon is his bastard, because he looked like Stark, more than any other Starks. So one of Jon's parents is a Stark. If he will bond with a dragon, it will be a definite prove, that the other of his parents is a Targaryen, or at least a Valyrian. And were there others Valyrians in Westeros aside from Targaryens' family, in times of Robert's rebellion? Someone whose ancestor is from one of the forty families who ruled Valyria? And who exactly could that be? Also if there were other Valyrians in Westeros, then why did Aerys has sent his cousin Steffon Baratheon to Essos, to search there a fiancee of Valyrian blood for Rhaegar (and it was just a few years prior rebellion, when Robert was 16)? Which proves that aside from Targaryens, there was no Valyrians in Westeros at that time. Thus if Jon will bond with a dragon, which is a prove that he has a dragon's blood, will also simultaneously prove that his father was Rhaegar. At that time in Westeros, there was only three Targaryens of appropriate age to have children - Aerys, Rhaella and Rhaegar. And first two were locked in Red Keep, when Jon was conceived. And also out of those three, only one was close to one of Starks, who could have been one of Jon's parents - Rhaegar, with Lyanna.    

If dragons will recognise Jon, it will prove that he is son of Rhaegar. There's just no other person with Valyrian blood, who could have been Jon's parent.

Quote

The legitimacy of Aegon/Young Griffin and Jon are mutually exclusive.  The benefit of the doubt goes to Aegon because Rhaegar and Elia were actually married and that marriage was consummated.  Aegon looks the part.  

Young Griff for the last 15+ years lived in Essos. Also there is actually no prove that he came from someplace else, like Westeros. Is it definite that he came from Westeros? No, it isn't. And his similarity with Rhaegar could mean that he is Valyrian, though not a Targaryen. Maybe Varys plotted all of this, to create for himself an opportunity in the future, to gain control over Iron Throne, thru this fake son of Rhaegar.

Quote

Aerys disinherited Rhaegar's children, present and future, when he passed the line of succession to Prince Viserys. 

Or he didn't disinherited Jon, only Rhaegar's children from Elia. And Viserys was his heir apparent only until Jon's birth. And maybe Rhaella didn't knew about Lyanna and her baby, or maybe she did knew, and she knew that Aerys wanted this baby to become successor of Iron Throne. Though after Aerys' death, she preferred to crown her own son, and not to wait at Dragonstone for arrival of Queen Lyanna and her Prince Jon. And then she died, and people from her entourage thought that Viserys is a legitimate King, and Aerys' heir.

Quote

And it would make sense that he would want to do this if RLJ is true.  Aerys would do everything in his power to prevent a half Stark from inheriting his throne. 

Maybe he would rather prefer half-Stark to be his sucessor, than half-Martell. Because King in The North did bend the knee to Aegon I, while Dornish people killed one of Aegon's wifes and her dragon. The North caused to Targaryens the least amount of troubles and problems, while Martells the most.

Quote

Rhaegar could not and cannot legally marry Lyanna.  Rhaegar was already married.  

ASOIAF is based on War of Roses, and other medieval European history and events. And Henry VIII with his multiple wives, and several marriage annulments, could be one of inspirations for GRRM.

He could have divorced, or annulled his marriage, or married second time, same as his ancestor Aegon I. Maybe he and Lyanna married according to ritual from religion of Old Gods, and not from Faith of Seven. Thus, at least at some level, both his marriages were legit.

2 hours ago, Pikachu101 said:
  1. Targaryen polygamy has only been done twice: Aegon was married before he converted, and Maegor's hated not exactly the best examples of why it should be allowed
  2. There are no living witnesses, Elizabeth Woodville's children were disinherited because she had a secret marriage same will happen with Jon if he tries to stake a claim
  3. I highly doubt Ned kept any evidence that Jon was Rhaegar's son, his word would have been enough 

4) Also this thread is under the impression that Jon would even want to stake a claim to the throne, can anyone give me a reason why he would? 

1. There are custom of multiple marriages among wildlings (at least there are cases when one man had two wives, and one female was married to two husbands).

2. There could be living witnesses. Three.

Howland Reed. Ashara Dayne (currently Howland's wife Jyana Reed). And Wylla - wet nurse of Jon, that lived with him in Winterfell, until she went back to Dorne, to become wet nurse for Edric Dayne (who I think is actually son of Howland Reed and Ashara Dayne, and twin brother of Jojen Reed).

3. Who knows what Lyanna made him promise.

Based on his thoughts, it seems as if though he didn't kept his promise. So maybe that promise was not only to protect Jon from Robert, but also make sure that Jon will get his rightful place, as Rhaegar's heir and King of 7K. So maybe there were documents that proved Jon's legal status, and Ned kept those documents. Though he never used them, because he didn't wanted to cause problems for his family, or have a confrontation against Robert, because of Jon. Thus he took Jon, and claimed him as his bastard, even though he promised to Lyanna, that he will aid Jon to become King, and had all needed documents and other evidences to prove Jon's claim.

4. In the prophecy it is said, that the Prince that was promised, will save people from Others. Prince. Not a bastard, or a commoner. Same as Rhaegar said something like he has to be a warrior, or knight, Jon has to be a Prince. He is legitimate ruler of 7K, and he will lead his people in the war against wights.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know if Westeros followed the medieval custom for mariages, but yeah, there is no way that marriage would have been legal :

- Rhaegar was already married with male children, getting a divorce would have been complicated.

- Rhaegar did not have the approval of Lyanna's father.

- Lyanna was already betrothed to Robert .

- No bann was publicly announced/published (The mariage would have been challenged by either Robert or Elia).

- What about the mariage contract, the dowry provided by the woman's father ?

I mean come on, my suspension of disbelief is pretty strong : dragons powers, undead and magical swords, are fine, but now you're telling me that Rhaegar, the second most important guy in the Kingdom got married a second time, his marriage certificate was sent to Oldtown and archived there without anyone linking it to the crown prince and the allegedly abducted Lyanna ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Tygett Lannister said:

Line of succession before battle of Trident:

1. Rhaegar

2. Aegon

3. Rhaenys

All Rhaegar's children is before any other children of Aerys. Thus Jon is ahead of Viserys.

Quote

4. Viserys

5. Rhaella

6. Baratheons

 

1 hour ago, Tygett Lannister said:

Jon is killed. If you believe he is no longer member of Night's watch after being resurrected (because that is a sure thing apparently) he doesn't have his claim back because he is considered a new person, resurrected people are not really human and I don't think non-humans are in line of succession.

He is not a new person. Resurrection doesn't make him to become someone else. Same as Lazarus and Jesus Christ, who remained who they were before.

In NW's vow, it's said until death. He died. His death came. It's like a working contract with a timeframe. Though unlike any other Brother, Jon will become alive again. Which won't make him someone else, but also won't nullify the fact that he died, and was dead, thus his watch is over.

Which doesn't remove him from succession line. Because when he will be alive again, he will have a claim. The fact that he was dead for some time, doesn't change identity of his parents. He is still son of Rhaegar and Lyanna.

Maybe his death will become a revealing factor for his origin. Maybe when Brothers will try to burn his body, instead it will be healed by fire, and he won't burn. And while his body was damaged, and dead, his soul was hiding in Ghost. And when his body will be restored, his soul will go back in his body.

 

If to save people from Others, Jon will have to be crowned, then people will choose him as their King.

 

17 minutes ago, Dood said:

- Rhaegar did not have the approval of Lyanna's father.

- Lyanna was already betrothed to Robert .

- No bann was publicly announced/published (The mariage would have been challenged by either Robert or Elia).

- What about the mariage contract, the dowry provided by the woman's father ?

Very funny. Very. Two words: Shaera, Jaehaerys.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You just ignored half of the facts I stated. Jon cannot be in line of succession if he is not even born yet.

11 minutes ago, Megorova said:

All Rhaegar's children is before any other children of Aerys. Thus Jon is ahead of Viserys.

Yes all Rhaegar's children come before any other children of Aerys ... only that Jon wasn't born when Viserys already became king and I don't recall Viserys abdicating his crown.

13 minutes ago, Megorova said:

He is not a new person. Resurrection doesn't make him to become someone else. Same as Lazarus and Jesus Christ, who remained who they were before.

Good job on comparing fictional resurrection that didn't even happen yet and a resurrection we know didn't happen. We know how resurrections in Asoiaf work and they make you a different person so he is a different person if I can use word person since Lady Stoneheart is not really a human. You can see big difference in personality of Catlyn and Lady Stoneheart. Can Lady Stoneheart claim Riverrun? No. 

13 minutes ago, Megorova said:

If to save people from Others, Jon will have to be crowned, then people will choose him as their King.

If you think this is Lord of the Rings you haven't been paying attention.

15 minutes ago, Megorova said:

In NW's vow, it's said until death. He died. His death came. It's like a working contract with a timeframe. Though unlike any other Brother, Jon will become alive again. Which won't make him someone else, but also won't nullify the fact that he died, and was dead, thus his watch is over.

Which doesn't remove him from succession line. Because when he will be alive again, he will have a claim. The fact that he was dead for some time, doesn't change identity of his parents. He is still son of Rhaegar and Lyanna.

Maybe his death will become a revealing factor for his origin. Maybe when Brothers will try to burn his body, instead it will be healed by fire, and he won't burn. And while his body was damaged, and dead, his soul was hiding in Ghost. And when his body will be restored, his soul will go back in his body.

Let's look at his vow:

Quote

Night gathers, and now my watch begins. It shall not end until my death. I shall take no wife, hold no lands, father no children. I shall wear no crowns and win no glory. I shall live and die at my post. I am the sword in the darkness. I am the watcher on the walls. I am the shield that guards the realms of men. I pledge my life and honor to the Night's Watch, for this night and all the nights to come.

It might say "it shall not end until my death" . But it also says he "shall wear no crowns and win no glory ... I pledge my life and honor to the Night's Watch, for this night and all the nights to come. " He pledges his life so after he is resurrected he has life and he still needs to respect his vow unless you say he is not the same person, but than he doesn't have claim anyways. If his watch ends with his death that doesn't means he is released of other vows (no wife, land children).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Megorova said:

1. There are custom of multiple marriages among wildlings (at least there are cases when one man had two wives, and one female was married to two husbands).

2. There could be living witnesses. Three.

Howland Reed. Ashara Dayne (currently Howland's wife Jyana Reed). And Wylla - wet nurse of Jon, that lived with him in Winterfell, until she went back to Dorne, to become wet nurse for Edric Dayne (who I think is actually son of Howland Reed and Ashara Dayne, and twin brother of Jojen Reed).

3. Who knows what Lyanna made him promise.

Based on his thoughts, it seems as if though he didn't kept his promise. So maybe that promise was not only to protect Jon from Robert, but also make sure that Jon will get his rightful place, as Rhaegar's heir and King of 7K. So maybe there were documents that proved Jon's legal status, and Ned kept those documents. Though he never used them, because he didn't wanted to cause problems for his family, or have a confrontation against Robert, because of Jon. Thus he took Jon, and claimed him as his bastard, even though he promised to Lyanna, that he will aid Jon to become King, and had all needed documents and other evidences to prove Jon's claim.

4. In the prophecy it is said, that the Prince that was promised, will save people from Others. Prince. Not a bastard, or a commoner. Same as Rhaegar said something like he has to be a warrior, or knight, Jon has to be a Prince. He is legitimate ruler of 7K, and he will lead his people in the war against wights.

1. Wildlings are not considered humans by most of the Iron Throne population.

2. And what do these witnesses know? They saw a baby come from Lyanna and it probably had a paper on him with text saying: true born son of Rhaegar. They can know that he is Rhaegar's son yes but they can't know anything about supposed secret marriages/ annulments/ legitimization. Ned was the only one who Lyanna could whisper something about it and he is dead.

3. Just lol

4. Yes because message of Asoiaf is prophecies always come true and should be fanatically listened to and blood is the most important thing there is, if you aren't born to the right person you cannot be savior. Mance also wasn't born prince or any kind of noble yet he became king, so can Jon become prince.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, Megorova said:

Young Griff for the last 15+ years lived in Essos. Also there is actually no prove that he came from someplace else, like Westeros. Is it definite that he came from Westeros? No, it isn't. And his similarity with Rhaegar could mean that he is Valyrian, though not a Targaryen. Maybe Varys plotted all of this, to create for himself an opportunity in the future, to gain control over Iron Throne, thru this fake son of Rhaegar.

I don't know how anything about Aegon will be proven. It's Varys's word against Tywin's who is now dead. Even Kevan Lannister says that no one really looked all that long at the baby because what was done to him was horrific.

And we still don't know what proof Varys has given Jon Connington to make him come on board with this. It was either very convincing or it's Jon Conn's desperation showing.

I do think that one of the reasons we are introduced to Aurane Waters is because he supposed to be a reminder that while from far he looks like Rhaegar, in the end, he really doesn't. Cersei spends a lot of time thinking about his looks and comes to the conclusion that he probably looks like the whores from Lys, even though Aurane Waters would technically be distant kin to Rhaegar and is a Velaryon by blood.

Quote

Or he didn't disinherited Jon, only Rhaegar's children from Elia. And Viserys was his heir apparent only until Jon's birth. And maybe Rhaella didn't knew about Lyanna and her baby, or maybe she did knew, and she knew that Aerys wanted this baby to become successor of Iron Throne. Though after Aerys' death, she preferred to crown her own son, and not to wait at Dragonstone for arrival of Queen Lyanna and her Prince Jon. And then she died, and people from her entourage thought that Viserys is a legitimate King, and Aerys' heir.

I sincerely doubt that Aerys had a single clue that Lyanna was pregnant, and even if he knew, there's nothing that says she would have a son. And he just got done roasting her father and having her brother strangled to death a few months before and wants Ned's head. Why in the world would he want to make her son the heir? That doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me.

I think Aegon was skipped over for the sake of blood purity. If Rhaegar had married a Targaryen or if there had been a Velaryon available for him to marry, that's where he would have been bid to marry. 

There's also the fact that Aerys believed that Prince Lewyn had betrayed Rhaegar on the Trident, not to mention all the people at court who may have thought the Dornish had far too much influence. 

Quote

4. In the prophecy it is said, that the Prince that was promised, will save people from Others. Prince. Not a bastard, or a commoner. Same as Rhaegar said something like he has to be a warrior, or knight, Jon has to be a Prince. He is legitimate ruler of 7K, and he will lead his people in the war against wights.

We already know there are some problems with the translation of the prophecy. The Prince might simply refers to some messianic-like figure who will return to save the humanity from this latest crisis. Why couldn't they be bastard-born or believed to be bastard-born? 

No one was looking for a girl as Maester Aemon put it because no one took into account that "prince" is gender neutral in High Valyrian. And no one is looking for a bastard boy either. Maybe that's the reason Mel is not understanding what the flames are telling her when she asks R'hllor to show her AA and he keeps showing her Snow. 

As far as I can tell with Jon and the whole PtwP prophecy, things are actually happening in reverse for him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...