R+L=J v 75

[Ser Creighton]

Jon was born 8 to 9 months before Dany. Dany was born 9 months after their flight to Dragonstone.

That places the Sack in the middle of the timeframe in which Jon was born.

Rhaella didn't leave for Dragonstone until after the Trident.. Which places Jon's birth in the month following the Trident, since the Sack occured two weeks after the Trident.

The sack actually occurs within a fortnight of Rhaegar leaving KL to go to the trident, the hand was named before Rhaegar left. Hand for a fortnight.

I am just going with what Martin said. When you say 8-9 months you actually allow for that window as your giving a month. As far as I know because we don't know the exact birth date of either you have a window. Which I am fine with as it does not matter all that much when the author gives a general time line, it's actually good enough for me to get the general idea.

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

The sack actually occurs within a fortnight of Rhaegar leaving KL to go to the trident, the hand was named before Rhaegar left. Hand for a fortnight.

I am just going with what Martin said. When you say 8-9 months you actually allow for that window as your giving a month. As far as I know because we don't know the exact birth date of either you have a window. Which I am fine with as it does not matter all that much when the author gives a general time line, it's actually good enough for me to get the general idea.

Might I trouble you with asking where it was stated that Rossart had been named Hand before Rhaegar left? :)

Edit: never mind, I found it :)

Though I used to assume that a mistake was made here, or a misremembering by Jaime (remembering another night he and Jon Darry listened to Aerys rape Rhaella after he burned someone), since it cannot be that Rhaegar marched to the Trident, fought, died, Ned and Robert discussed who should live amongst the captices, and Ned racing back to KL with an army, all in a fortnight.

It already takes the royal party leaving from Winterfell a fortnight to get from Castle Darry (closeby) to KL (though, admittedly, Ned would be travelling faster with his army)

[Ser Creighton]

I'm not saying he's a troll full stop. But that behavior was extremely trollish, imo.

I have other words for trollish. But I am not a fan of arguing just to argue or by trying to set up an argument by feigning ignorance. If it was in fact ignorance the argument would make sense to me, but that does not appear to be the case.

[Ser Creighton]

Might I trouble you with asking where it was stated that Rossart had been named Hand before Rhaegar left? :)

Jaime, Rhaegar was still assembling the army when Rossart got named, he wanted to go to him after the burning of the (was it mace and shield hand?), but he was busy. I can look it up for the exact quote. Darry is also still there.

[Rhaegar I Targaryen]

I have other words for trollish. But I am not a fan of arguing just to argue or by trying to set up an argument by feigning ignorance. If it was in fact ignorance the argument would make sense to me, but that does not appear to be the case.

Does anyone else think it's extremely trollish that stateofdissipation attempts to subject everyone else's arguments to his version of intellectual rigor, even though he spent a good part of yesterday playing dumb when presented with an inconvenient fact?

I'll stick my hand up. Though not a fan of the word trollish.

I'm not saying he's a troll full stop. But that behavior was extremely trollish, imo.

This has been going on for the last 3 threads, it's becoming unbearable. Good points are raised, then rejected out of hand almost 100% of the time by some of us..

The polygamy stuff/Jon's legitimacy is interesting, but only to a point. Let's find something else to discuss

[stateofdissipation]

1. Ok, so if I understand correctly, you do believe that Jon is legit, right?

That means one of two things happened:

(1) either Rhaegar married Lyanna before Jon was born

(2) or Jon was legitimized after his birth

2. Since no one at court (Pycelle, the Lannister-supporter, Varys, Barristan, Jaime) seems to have known anything about a legitimization, we can safely assume that Aerys did not legitimize Jon, something which would have been a difficult thing to do in any case, because Jon was born within the month after the Trident, and Aerys died a fortnight after the Trident.

3. That allows us to assume that Rhaegar was married to Lyanna.

4. As said before, Rhaegar most likely expected a daughter.

A. Dany already mentions that Rhaegar had gotten himself an Aegon and a Rhaenys, and was only missing a Visenya.

B. Jorah stated that the three-headed dragon were Aegon and his sisters.

C. Rhaegar stated that "the dragon must have three heads, there must be one more". All that was missing, was another girl, whom he could name Visenya, and marry to Aegon, together with Rhaenys.

5. In order to be allowed to marry a daughter to the King-to-be, the girl would have to be legit.

A. Aerys died before he could do such a thing,

B. but I doubt that Rhaegar had planned to let Aerys do so anyway, since upon his return to KL, before he left for the Trident, Rhaegar stated that "changes" would be made upon his return.

C. Changes which would, as agreed upon by most of the fandom, end the reign of Aerys and begin the reign of Rhaegar.

D. , when Rhaegar was king himself, he could legitimize the child. But that would hurt the status his little Visenya would have.

6. There is another thing. Rhaegar seems to have loved Lyanna.

A. He died with her name on his lips.

B. These were feelings he did not have for his wife Elia, though.

C. So if your family has practices polygamy in the past (and keep in mind, we don't know how recent the last polygamous marriage in the Targaryen family was),

D. and you need another legitimate daughter, marrying the girl you're trying to get pregnant seems like the easiest solution.

7. There would absolutely be no reason to set Elia aside,

A. though. Barristan said it himself, Rhaegar was fond of Elia.

B. He also needed the support of House Martell,

C. because insulting them (after the insults at Harrenhal) could cause another war - in a land already ripped apart by war.

D. The Martells did not start to lose significant numbers of men until the Trident.

E. The rest of the loyalist armies had been fighting for much longer.

F. In addition, setting aside your wife would endanger the position of Aegon, the heir.

G. His claim could be questioned, leading to more wars.

8. Seriously. There does not seem to be any disadvantage to a polygamous marriage.

A. Yes, it will insult the Martells,

B. but not as much as setting aside Elia,

C. which could lead to a whole lot more complications, all endangering Rhaegar's position, and those of his children.

9. The Martells swallowed their anger after Harrenhal because they knew that Elia would one day be Queen.

A. Removing that, there would have been nothing to stop Dorne from withdrawing their support during the Rebellion, and rebelling themselves, or joining Robert.

10, With so many disadvantages when setting aside one wife and marrying another, and with polygamous history,

A. with precedents and all in existence,

B, why is it so hard to believe that Rhaegar most likely entered a polygamous marriage?

11. Which brings me to the (IIRC) original point of the entire conversation.

A. Why were the KG at the TOJ?

B, They swore vows (to protect the King),

C. and they acknowledge that Viserys is at Dragonstone,

D. and that they believe he is protected well enough,

E. but specifically state that Viserys is not protected by someone from the KG.

12. Why say such a thing, after the deaths of Rhaegar, Aerys

A, and Aegon,

B. such a specific thing (he's not a KG, he's not one of the seven people who vowed to die in the service of their king, protecting him with their lives),

C. when Viserys appears to be the next King in line?

D. Viserys was even crowned on Dragonstone (although that might have happened later, entirely possible, but it does show that to everyone, Viserys was the next dragon King).

13. The most logic answer to that question,

A. as has been argued here, is that there was someone in that tower who needed the protection of the KG (and the KG specifically) more than Viserys.

B. Who needs KG protection more than the King? Well, no one.

14. No one claims that Jon has to be legit because the KG were at TOJ.

A. They had been there for quite some time. But all evidence points to Jon being legit,

B. because the KG stayed at TOJ,

C, even after all their sworn brothers had died, and

D, none of them even tried to go to Viserys.

1. There are enough clues to Jon being legitimate that it is easier to accept it than refute it.

2. This assumes that these were the only people at court and that some or all of these people would have known. I do not make that assumption. I also do not make the assumption that Varys had the same relationship that he had with Robert with Aerys. I also do not assume that Varys tells many people all he knows. I also do not specify the process other than it must have been Royal Decree or the timeframe outside of or narrower than the Harrenhal tournament and the Trident. I gave only motive, means and opportunity.

3. Assuming does not make it a fact. Neither does it eliminate the practice of legitimization.

4. A, B, C really do not relate to the topic at hand. No idea why I split it up other than I hoped to find a connection to legitimacy.

5. I am relatively sure a King can marry whoever he wants. He could legitimize a girl.

A. Between the harrenhal tournament and the Trident was the window of opportunity. So no Aerys was not dead yet,

B. Between the harrenhal tournament and the Trident was the window of opportunity. However, it is unlikely he would have attempted to do so after leaving the ToJ as he had decided to depose his father.

C. agreed as well as D.

6. Agreed. Lyanna had expressed distrust and dislike for a man who could not keep to one bed (Robert) at the Harrenhal tournament.

A. The strangest thing happened. I read a GRRM interview that said the same thing. However when I went back to the book it still said "a woman's name" did that happen to you too? Maybe it will be in there for the author's edition... oh wait the book is the author's edition. I won't hold my breath.

B. Agreed

C. Distant and long dead relatives had done so. However look at 6. Now we know it wasn't recent or well recorded enough to specify. Now look back 6.

D. This is mixing the 6 paragraph with the 4.

7. see 6: and your 6.

A. agreed.

B. You fail to say why or when they are needed. furthermore it ignores the insult at Harrenhal and the new wife (however it is reached) theory.

C.See B. and again you fail to specify. Between the tournament and Robert's rebellion the country was not war torn.

D. Ok.

E. ok

F. We did not establish procedutes for setting aside or impact on inheritence. and see B...

G. see above

8. See 6 yours and mine.

A.and B see points 6 and 7

C. Again see 6 and 7

9. ok

A, Between Harrenhal and the Rebellion was the timeframe given.

10. see 6, 7 and 8

A. a precedent is what was decided last and not first. Check Roe V Wade....plus it was not civil but religous marriage

B.. see 6, 7, 8, and A above. Not hard to believe... hard to prove a superior option without rigging the game.

11. good topic

A, lots of speculation. Not enough facts to make a conclusion outside there was something important to Rhaegar there.

B. YES they were KG protect the king, obey his orders, and keep his secrets...The vow Arthur mentions is not specified. If he said we are kingsguard... there is no question. he didn't.

C. They recognize that Ned has said Darry has fled. And add kingsguard did not and will not flee.

D. They acknowledge Darry is a good man and true. They do not mention Visery's protection or the locations of the 3 other KG.

E.They do not state he is or is not protected or who is doing it.

12. 7 facing 3, They state they will not flee or bend the knee. (taking a quick look at a map tells us that to go anywhere the KG needed to fight- They took flight and surrender off the table)

A. Only Rhaegar and Aerys are mentioned. Aegon is not listed in the discussion.

B. again they took flight and surrender off the table... reminds me of Dayne against the Smiling Kinight... Then you shall have it ser-

C. and when 7 men stand between them and the apparent king.

D. They never made it there... or anywhere else.

13. Most logical is what includes the widest range of possibility

A, It has not been argued enough that 7 men stood between the KG and Viserys.

B. And how do you protect a king without fighting his enemies? you don't.

14. you should read this thread.... nobody should=/=nobody does

A. There are sufficient clues to make arguing against Jon being legitimate harder than accepting the possibility.

B.C and D all state the same questionable premise. There are many more clues... the Crypts of winterfell, Ned's response to Robert applies equally to Jon and Lyanna if R plus L =J and Jon is legitimate, The raven Jon King, Thorne interactions have clues, Jon even comments on his "royal blood" the blue rose in the wall of ice... Rhaegar's there must be 3. I could go on... but none are proof and none defy alternative explaination... just like the ToJ

[Suzanna Stormborn]

More to the root of the discussion....Maybe this has been asked before, but I havent seen it....

Could Rhaegar have put Elia aside at some point while/during his falling in love with Lyanna?

I mean what is the premise for divorce in the 7K?

Since Rhaegar was the heir couldnt he have just sort of said it out loud and that would make it so, like to one of the kingsguard or something?

Maybe right before he 'married' Lyanna couldnt he have just stated, "I am done with Elia, we are no longer married' and it would have been official?

Obviously these would all be off-screen conversations so there is no way to be sure. But if that had happened then the whole polygamy debate is off the table right?

[The guy from the Vale]

More to the root of the discussion....Maybe this has been asked before, but I havent seen it....

Could Rhaegar have put Elia aside at some point while/during his falling in love with Lyanna?

I mean what is the premise for divorce in the 7K?

Since Rhaegar was the heir couldnt he have just sort of said it out loud and that would make it so, like to one of the kingsguard or something?

Maybe right before he 'married' Lyanna couldnt he have just stated, "I am done with Elia, we are no longer married' and it would have been official?

Obviously these would all be off-screen conversations so there is no way to be sure. But if that had happened then the whole polygamy debate is off the table right?

Well, the main problem with that is that it's impossible to have kept that one under wraps. Elia would have known, and by extension her brothers.

[MtnLion]

1, Well let us look to slavery in Essos. The Seven Kingdoms do not condemn the practice in Essos. However. a person in the Seven Kingdoms found selling poachers into slavery was sentenced to death for his crime.

Now point to an example of a person from the Seven Kingdoms that has engaged in the practice

Euron

[Rhaegar I Targaryen]

More to the root of the discussion....Maybe this has been asked before, but I havent seen it....

Could Rhaegar have put Elia aside at some point while/during his falling in love with Lyanna?

I mean what is the premise for divorce in the 7K?

Since Rhaegar was the heir couldnt he have just sort of said it out loud and that would make it so, like to one of the kingsguard or something?

Maybe right before he 'married' Lyanna couldnt he have just stated, "I am done with Elia, we are no longer married' and it would have been official?

Obviously these would all be off-screen conversations so there is no way to be sure. But if that had happened then the whole polygamy debate is off the table right?

I imagine it would have been hard to keep that under wraps.

I still subscribe to the idea that Rhaegar meant to remove Aerys from the throne (told Jaime this), said as much about it to the KG at the ToJ, and planned on either legitimizing Jon or simply ensuring that he was well off.

Like I said a few threads back, Jon doesn't need to be a king, he simply needs to be.

[Suzanna Stormborn]

Well, the main problem with that is that it's impossible to have kept that one under wraps. Elia would have known, and by extension her brothers.

but what if Rhaegar only said it in the tower of joy to a few people who then died very soon after?

[The guy from the Vale]

He would need to request it in front of the High Septon. I posted the relevant SSM just a few posts upthread.

[Suzanna Stormborn]

He would need to request it in front of the High Septon. I posted the relevant SSM just a few posts upthread.

oh ok, So he could have said it, but it wouldnt be legal unless it was in front of the High Septon.

[stateofdissipation]

1. For the rules of annulment, see this SSM. Rhaegar would have had to appear in front of the High Septon to request the annulment. It would have been a public matter. Tyrion is still married to Tysha because he did not appear in front of the High Septon.

2. Yes it is. Curiously enough, the Old Gods do not forbid polygamy (see: Ygon Oldfather). We don't even have comments of Septons on polygamy being a sin. See a pattern emerging?

3. Nothing of all of that means any of them did. But noone remembers any of their wives, and either might have had two wives. We simply do not know, and your insistence that absence of evidence equal evidence of absence does not hold. As long as we do not know the marital arrangements of Jaehaerys II or Aegon V, your statement that there was no Targaryen polygamy in living memory is unsupported by the text.

4.

B. Aerys was not paranoid of his KG. They were the only ones allowed to carry swords in his presence.

C. Legitimization in and of itself might be possible but unlikely. Legitimization without Jaime knowing is impossible precisely because Aerys kept Jaime close and still trusted his KG.

D. Of course Aerys knew. I am saying the Kingsguard (at the very least, Jaime) would have known about the legitimization, and hence about the existence of Jon. Jaime has no idea, so this means that the legitimization did not happen.

E. You mean Varys, not Viserys? And Varys had his reputation of omniscience back in Aerys' days already. If you think Varys changed his MO once Robert took power, you have to prove that assertion.

F./G. No, I am not inventing them. See the SSM quoted at the start of this post.

H: So the marriage to Elia can't have been annulled without Elia and, by extension, her brothers knowing. But the Martells assume Elia was married to Rhaegar until the end, so there was no annulment. Do we agree on this at least?

9. I have been very patient and polite here. I do not wish to bring this discussion to the ad hominem level. Goodbye.

1 you found the rules for Sansa's annulment. She was married by the High Septon. Tyrion appeared before the septon. He was married by a septon. Did you actually read your link?

GeoRR: no one needs to be present to annul a marriage

2, YES there is a distinct pattern: NO CHARACTER in the Seven Kingdoms has been reported to have engaged in polygamy in since before the reign of Aerys yet people keep claiming it is a probability.

3: We claim there has not been reported polygamy since that time. Because it is true.

4.

B. Now we have that part established we may continue... KG kept swords.

C. We covered that one may use Close to support the position. You changed close to omnipresent and omnicient. (sticking it at the end didn't hide it) without those two your impossible just kind of withers and dies. so does unlikely...repeating B does not help the case for C.

D. You really just repeated C. However, I would agree that Aerys might have known if had he signed the decree.

E. So Varys was spying on Aerys. (ugh that just looks wrong) Interesting speculation. it still does not equal omnipresence and omnicience. Umm I did not claim anything. You did you set varys up as omnicient and omnipresent in the reign of Aerys. I just asked where you got that. You made the claim Varys would have to have known. Prove it.

F, you expanded the interview from a question about Sansa to annulment in general. I read your link. You might have. I did not invent additional meaning for it. YOU DID.

H. Read your own link GeoRR: no one needs to be present to annul a marriage

9 paitience is a virtue... politeness is always nice... i am not sure where pulling stuff out of your butt fits in. but it apparently ends in Goodbye when somebody is called on it.

[Chebyshov]

Can annulments even be granted in marriages with 2 kids? Obviously Westerosi laws are different than our domestic laws, but I feel like if it's been clearly consummated and resulted in kids an annulment would be a bit of a reach.

[Ser Creighton]

Euron

Cersei, had the mother of Roberts twin bastards sold to a passing slaver.

[The guy from the Vale]

oh ok, So he could have said it, but it wouldnt be legal unless it was in front of the High Septon.

No, not even that either. Rhaegar can say what he likes, but only the High Septon as the representative of the Seven on Earth (or GRRth, or whatever) can annul the marriage. In order to annul the marriage, Rhaegar would have to request an annulment from the High Septon. He can't do it on his own.

[Ygrain]

Can annulments even be granted in marriages with 2 kids? Obviously Westerosi laws are different than our domestic laws, but I feel like if it's been clearly consummated and resulted in kids an annulment would be a bit of a reach.

Perhaps if Rhaegar accused Elia of adultery and put the legitimacy of his children by her in doubt - but I can't imagine how this would cause less trouble than polygamy.

[stateofdissipation]

Euron

Silly me, I again forgot to include the obvious. practice does not equal crime. By that reasoning the Mountain practiced murder. Euron apparently practiced theft and murder as well.

On that note the practice of polygamy is completely valid in the Seven Kingdoms (as long as you do not get caught) come to think of it anything is valid anywhere (as long as you don't get caught)

[MtnLion]

There was also a singer who lost a tongue for expressing his views on Robert....

Do NOT mix screenplay with canon. Marilion offended Joffrey and had his tongue removed int he screenplay, yet in canon he is the singer at the Eyrie and still singing.