R+L=J v.123

[RumHam]

He didn't. He said "defying convention".

...I know this. I think you're missing my point. Mountain Lion seemed to think that because he didn't include "defying the law" then it's clear it wasn't illegal. I'm saying this is not the case because the king never has to worry about defying the law. So there's no reason Martin would have said anything about defying the law in that SSM.

Rhaenys, you're awesome!

That point about Argillac and Sharra is big, IMO. Do we know what religion was followed in the Stormlands and Riverlands at that time?

The Seven. The stuff about Argillac (and I can provide you with other examples of pre-Targaryen Westerosi kings practicing polygamy, I recently added them to the polygamy page on the wiki) really isn't relevant when we're trying to figure out if polygamy is legal under the modern laws of the Seven Kingdoms as established by Jaehaerys.

[J. Stargaryen]

At this point? No, thanks. I've floated some good questions and a few ideas here along the way, and the feedback I've received has been... well, less than encouraging. So as much as I appreciate the invitation, I'll keep this one to myself.

I'm so surprised by your answer. After all, the we can't even prove R&L had sex argument is straight from JNR's playbook.

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

Edit:

Wait, how is this unclear when you posted this quote:

Did Daemon want his marriage to Rhea undone when proposin to marry Rhaenyra because polygamy was illegal, or because he simply wanted to get rid of Rhea, a wish he demonstrated as early as 103 AC? That's the unclear part..

The Seven. The stuff about Argillac (and I can provide you with other examples of pre-Targaryen Westerosi kings practicing polygamy, I recently added them to the polygamy page on the wiki) really isn't relevant when we're trying to figure out if polygamy is legal under the modern laws of the Seven Kingdoms as established by Jaehaerys.

Ah, Jaehaerys and his dealing with the Faith,

Ok, back to the section on Jaehaerys I

To quote it all:

Yet some say the most important achevement of the rule of Jaehaerys and Septon Barth was a reconciliation with the Faith. The Poor Fellows and Warrior's Sons, no longer hunted as they had been in Maegor's day, were much reduced and officially outlawed thanks to Maegor, but they were still present. More pressingly, the Faith's traditional right to judge its own had begun to prove troublesome, and many lords complained of unscrupulous septries and septons making free with the wealth and property of their neughbours and those they preached to.

Some counselors urged the Old King to deal with the remnants of the Faith Militant harshly - to stamp them out once and fore all before their zealotry could return the realm to chaos. Others cared more for ensuring that the septons were answerable to the same justice as the rest of the realm. But Jaehaerys instead dispatched Septon Barth to Oldtown, to speak with the High Septon, and there they began to forge a lasting agreement. In return for the last few Starts and Swords puttnig down their weapons, and for agreeing to accept outside justice, th eHigh Septon received King Jaehaerys's sworn oath that the Iron Throne would always protect and defend the Faith., In this way, the great schism between crown and Faith was forever healed.

The entire passage suggests nothing about the specific issue's between Faith and crown.

However, it is clear that those following the Faith had no (or little) problem with polygamous marriages (examples being Argilac, Sharra, and the more ancient, yet still Seven-following, kings of the respective Kingdoms). So if there was no (or only little) problem with polygamous marriages before the Targaryens came, why would it suddenly be such a big issue of the Faith after the Targaryens arrived?

[Ygrain]

The Seven. The stuff about Argillac (and I can provide you with other examples of pre-Targaryen Westerosi kings practicing polygamy, I recently added them to the polygamy page on the wiki) really isn't relevant when we're trying to figure out if polygamy is legal under the modern laws of the Seven Kingdoms as established by Jaehaerys.

Le sigh. You're completely missing the point. Incest is and always was a great social and religious taboo but this was NOT the case with polygamy. It is very relevant for social acceptability of polygamy.

[The Snowfyre Chorus]

I'm so surprised by your answer. After all, the we can't even prove R&L had sex argument is straight from JNR's playbook.

Sort of. Actually, JNR and I have a minor disagreement on that point of emphasis. He doesn't see why I'd focus on the issue of sex, given that there's really no evidence L and R were even on the same continent during Robert's Rebellion.

Since I really can't argue with that, I told him to stop acting like a troll. He insulted my reading comprehension skills, and suggested I was blind. Finally we decided to split our discussion into two threads, because we couldn't get along. It's probably better in the end. We're just too different, and we don't see things the same way.

.

[markg171]

... from reading comprehension to grasp of English. Wow, what an improvement. Perhaps we might try to link angels dancing on a pin point with the theory of gravity.

At the time of Ned's thought, Jon is neither infant nor has his skull ever been bashed.

It seems that the only reading comprehension and grasp of English required in this thread, is that needed to come to the conclusion of R+L=J, while anything else is sub-adequate.

[markg171]

Ah, but markg fabricates loads of crap in his own view, too. As an example, in the post that you responded to, "the steward made the seating arrangements." That is not in the books.

It's not in the books, but that's what a steward's job is... I think that's a safe conclusion ;)

[markg171]

Kind of funny that this 'brilliant' alternative to R+L is yet again not mentioned.

I'm not exactly sure why you insist on there being an alternative, when this theory is itself the alternative to the story. It's up to you guys to prove it, not the naysayers.

[RumHam]

Did Daemon want his marriage to Rhea undone when proposin to marry Rhaenyra because polygamy was illegal, or because he simply wanted to get rid of Rhea, a wish he demonstrated as early as 103 AC? That's the unclear part..

Gotcha. I think since his ultimate goal was to marry Rhaenyra to get to the throne he probably wouldn't have said "now you have to let me marry your daughter. ...Unless you won't let me divorce my wife because I hate her." You know what I mean? I think he would have taken her as a second wife if it was an option.

Ah, Jaehaerys and his dealing with the Faith,

Ok, back to the section on Jaehaerys I

To quote it all:

snip

The entire passage suggests nothing about the specific issue's between Faith and crown.

However, it is clear that those following the Faith had no (or little) problem with polygamous marriages (examples being Argilac, Sharra, and the more ancient, yet still Seven-following, kings of the respective Kingdoms). So if there was no (or only little) problem with polygamous marriages before the Targaryens came, why would it suddenly be such a big issue of the Faith after the Targaryens arrived?

I don't really think it's clear the Faith had no (or little) problem with polygamy just because some kings suggested it or practiced it anyway. The worldbook makes it clear the Faith and most of the populous are against it.

[Maegor] had wed her in a Valyrian ceremony officiated by Queen Visenya for want of a septon willing to wed them. The public outcry was such that Aenys was finally forced to exile his brother.

Aenys seemed content to let the matter lie with Maegor’s exile, but the High Septon was still not satisfied. Not even the appointment of the reputed miracle-worker, Septon Murmison, as Aenys’s new Hand could wholly repair the breach with the Faith.

Pre-conquest the High Septons' influence was probably limited by the fact that he was based in the Reach. Thus I would imagine he didn't have nearly as much influence over the other kingdoms as he did there.

Just speculation, but when Garland II Gardner married the daughter of king Hightower to bring Oldtown into the reach he put aside his other wives. Possibly because he just absorbed the capitol of the Faith and the pious Hightowers weren't ok with polygamy.

Anyway as I said before I don't necessarily think Jaehaerys banned it as part of the reconciliation. More likely he did it as part of the unification of the laws, possibly in part because of the Faith's distaste for it.

Le sigh. You're completely missing the point. Incest is and always was a great social and religious taboo but this was NOT the case with polygamy. It is very relevant for social acceptability of polygamy.

I thought we were talking about it the section of the reference guide on polygamy possibly being illegal. Not how socially acceptable it is or was three hundred years ago.

[BearQueen87]

I'm not exactly sure why you insist on there being an alternative, when this theory is itself the alternative to the story. It's up to you guys to prove it, not the naysayers.

Except the story in universe---Ned and Wylla--has a ton of flaws and alternative also in text. Like the fisherman's daughter and Ashara Dayne. So which in universe story do you think we should accept? OR are they all wrong and there is another version--like GRRM himself has said about Jon's true parentage having to come out eventually. Or other sly hints, like answering who named Dany, Tyrion and Jon. When it comes to Dany and Tyrion...GRRM says "mother" or "father" but with Jon he quickly changes tactic and says "Ned named Jon."

[The guy from the Vale]

For the entire polygamy stuff: I'm with Ygrain and MtnLion that the shorter version should suffice. And as Rhaenys pointed out, polygamy seems to have been practised by believers of the Faith of the Seven before the Targaryen invasion (as well as First Men up until the time of the series), so apparently it isn't as much of an issue for the Faith (or the Old God believers) as some make it out to be. In the end, polygamy may be uncommon, but it apparently isn't illegal; and even if it was illegal for the general populace, the Targaryens were regarded as above those laws. The practise may have cost the Targs some political capital, but Rhaegar probably was the one person with the most political influence up until the start of the rebellion.

[The guy from the Vale]

Gotcha. I think since his ultimate goal was to marry Rhaenyra to get to the throne he probably wouldn't have said "now you have to let me marry your daughter. ...Unless you won't let me divorce my wife because I hate her." You know what I mean? I think he would have taken her as a second wife if it was an option.

I don't really think it's clear the Faith had no (or little) problem with polygamy just because some kings suggested it or practiced it anyway. The worldbook makes it clear the Faith and most of the populous are against it.

Pre-conquest the High Septons' influence was probably limited by the fact that he was based in the Reach. Thus I would imagine he didn't have nearly as much influence over the other kingdoms as he did there.

Just speculation, but when Garland II Gardner married the daughter of king Hightower to bring Oldtown into the reach he put aside his other wives. Possibly because he just absorbed the capitol of the Faith and the pious Hightowers weren't ok with polygamy.

Anyway as I said before I don't necessarily think Jaehaerys banned it as part of the reconciliation. More likely he did it as part of the unification of the laws, possibly in part because of the Faith's distaste for it.

I thought we were talking about it the section of the reference guide on polygamy possibly being illegal. Not how socially acceptable it is or was three hundred years ago.

What would be the basis for making polygamy illegal though? The most probable reason would be that the Faith insisted on polygamy being a sin, but the Faith didn't insist re: the less powerful Southern Kingdoms before the Targaryen invasion, when they had more weight they could throw around. So we have no indication the Faith would care enough about the question of polygamy to try and rein in the Six Southron Kingdoms, much less the unified Targaryen kings of the Seven Kingdoms.

[IceFire125]

I'm not exactly sure why you insist on there being an alternative, when this theory is itself the alternative to the story. It's up to you guys to prove it, not the naysayers.

DUDE!!! NO WAY!! REALLY?? then I must have gotten it all wrong. Now I understand what you've been saying all along...

So Ned slept with Ashara= she gave birth to Jon's face obviously and probably his upper body, arms and hands.

Then Ned slept with Wylla= she gave birth to Jon's body around the stomach to his hip.

Finally, Ned slept with the fisherman's daughter= she gave birth to Jon's thighs, legs and feet.

Then it was all magic from there, GRRM will totally explain it and piece it all together, I'm confident of that now.

I don't know why there aren't people like you to point out the error of our ways, markg171, there should be more of you out there. I bow down to your superior knowledge of the books.

[BearQueen87]

What would be the basis for making polygamy illegal though? The most probable reason would be that the Faith insisted on polygamy being a sin, but the Faith didn't insist re: the less powerful Southern Kingdoms before the Targaryen invasion, when they had more weight they could throw around. So we have no indication the Faith would care enough about the question of polygamy to try and rein in the Six Southron Kingdoms, much less the unified Targaryen kings of the Seven Kingdoms.

And, just to throw this out there, if the Faith had that much power to insist that polygamy be made illegal for "sin" reasons, then why not also outlaw incest while you're at it? The thing that Targs kept on doing...again and again and again...

[markg171]

Except the story in universe---Ned and Wylla--has a ton of flaws and alternative also in text. Like the fisherman's daughter and Ashara Dayne. So which in universe story do you think we should accept? OR are they all wrong and there is another version--like GRRM himself has said about Jon's true parentage having to come out eventually. Or other sly hints, like answering who named Dany, Tyrion and Jon. When it comes to Dany and Tyrion...GRRM says "mother" or "father" but with Jon he quickly changes tactic and says "Ned named Jon."

But see that's thing. Those are ways to try and prove R+L=J. That's fine. Turning around and trying to tell people that THEY must present a better alternative to your alternative, should not be the approach taken when R+L=J IS the alternative.

It's up to the people who want to dispute Ned as Jon's father to prove that he is not. It's not up to the naysayers to prove that Ned is his father as that's the official story. If you want to cast doubt on that, that's your job. It's not our job to provide an alternative to your alternative when the text says Ned is Jon's father. Your theory is unofficial one, not ours.

[BearQueen87]

But see that's thing. Those are ways to try and prove R+L=J. That's fine. Turning around and trying to tell people that THEY must present a better alternative to your alternative, should not be the approach taken when R+L=J IS the alternative.

It's up to the people who want to dispute Ned as Jon's father to prove that he is not. It's not up to the naysayers to prove that Ned is his father as that's the official story. If you want to cast doubt on that, that's your job. It's not our job to provide an alternative to your alternative when the text says Ned is Jon's father. Your theory is unofficial one, not ours.

I won't argue with anything you just wrote because it could go in circles. Instead I will literally ask one question...

If you believe Ned Stark to be Jon Snow's father, then who is Jon's mother? I don't know that I've ever actually seen you say.

[The Twinslayer]

...I know this. I think you're missing my point. Mountain Lion seemed to think that because he didn't include "defying the law" then it's clear it wasn't illegal. I'm saying this is not the case because the king never has to worry about defying the law. So there's no reason Martin would have said anything about defying the law in that SSM.

The Seven. The stuff about Argillac (and I can provide you with other examples of pre-Targaryen Westerosi kings practicing polygamy, I recently added them to the polygamy page on the wiki) really isn't relevant when we're trying to figure out if polygamy is legal under the modern laws of the Seven Kingdoms as established by Jaehaerys.

Also, it isn't clear whether Argilac and Sharra were proposing that Aegon take a third wife or if they were proposing that Aegon set aside Visenya and Rhaenys in order to take a new wife (as Renly was hoping to have Robert set Cersei aside, and Daemon Targaryen wanted to set Rhea Royce aside, so they could each take a new wife). This is probably particularly true in the case of Sharra, since she wanted as part of the deal for Aegon to name her son by another man to be his heir, which would be very unusual if it was still possible that he would father trueborn children on one of his other wives.

In Argilac's case, I think Aegon's response was intended to be insulting. Argilac suggests that Aegon set aside his sisters to marry Argilac's daughter, and Aegon pretends to misunderstand the question by implying that Argilac is suggesting that his daughter should take up third place.

[The Twinslayer]

During the Wars of Conquest, both King Argilic and Queen Sharra offered a third wife to Aegon Targaryen. Despite these offers were made for their respective reasons, both Argilic and Sharra were aware of Aegon's two wives, and yet, Argilic was still willing to marry his only daughter and heir to Aegon, and Sharra was still willing to marry Aegon herself.^{[The World of Ice and Fire/The Conquest]}

I don't think this essay belongs in the Reference Guide, but nevertheless I'd suggest some corrections.

Here, it is not clear that Argilac and Sharra each offered Aegon a third wife -- as you noted about Daemon and Rhaenyra later on, it is not clear that Argilac and Sharra were proposing polygamous marriages rather than asking Aegon to set aside Visenya and Rhaenys.

There are no known polygamous Targs after Maegor, even though this SSM (quote) establishes that Maegor's precedent is still valid and that there was no clear dividing line in the author's mind after which polygamy was no longer possible. The author only states that later on without dragons, it would have been more difficult for the Targaryens to get their deviations frlom the social norms accepted (SSMs quotes)

Instead of "it would have been more difficult for the Targaryens to get their deviations from the social norms" you should say "it would have been more difficult for the Targaryens to defy the Faith, convention and the other lords," since that is the language from the SSM.

Due to the lack of further polygamous marriages, it has been argued that polygamy was banned by Jaehaerys the Conciliator in order to appease the Faith. However, there is no textual basis to support this claim. On the contrary, on several occasions, polygamy is raised as a legitimate option, most notably in the series itself (Jorah quote). Furthermore, polygamy is discussed as an option for Daemon Blackfyre.^{[The World of Ice and Fire/Daeron II]}

It really isn't correct to say there is no textual basis to support this claim (unless you are in the camp that thinks there is no textual basis to support the claim that Rhaegar and Lyanna had sex). There is plenty of circumstantial evidence. For example, the SSM you cite says that polygamy defied the Faith. When he was reconciled with the Faith, Jaehaerys swore to protect and defend the Faith. Then, Jaehaerys passed a new, unified code of laws. Prior to that code of laws, there are instances of polygamy. Afterwards, there are not. Instead, you get statements like Connington's statement to the Halfmaester that, if Aegon VI marries a lady in Westeros, he will no longer be "free" to marry Dany. You also have the fact that everyone immediately understood that when Robb married Jeyne Westerling, his betrothal to the Freys was terminated automatically. This is just some of the evidence that supports the inference that polygamy was illegal after Jaehaerys passed the unified code.

Furthermore, even if the ban on polygamy was ever codified, it needn't apply to the Targs themselves as the series clearly states that (quote about Targs above laws of gods and men). Their privileged status is clearly depicted in the issue of incest (quote abomination in the eyes of gods old and new, + quote from Dunk and Egg about unacceptablity of incest for anyone but Targs) which freely continued even after the disappearance of dragons (quote how septons turned a blind eye to it).

This isn't accurate either. The quote you are referencing says that the "dragon kings" did not answer to gods or men and that they married brother to sister. It does not say that the laws "needn't apply to the Targs themselves." This is important, of course, because Rhaegar was not the king.

[Han Snow]

I won't argue with anything you just wrote because it could go in circles. Instead I will literally ask one question...

If you believe Ned Stark to be Jon Snow's father, then who is Jon's mother? I don't know that I've ever actually seen you say.

Why bother with this guy? Obvious bait is obvious bait.

[Black Crow]

And, just to throw this out there, if the Faith had that much power to insist that polygamy be made illegal for "sin" reasons, then why not also outlaw incest while you're at it? The thing that Targs kept on doing...again and again and again...

I think that this is something which still has relevance in the real world today. Incest is unquestionably a bad thing and if you want a short-form, a sin. Polygamy on the other hand is a matter of custom and practice, its a cultural rather than a moral or religious issue. In practical terms its actually the opposite of incest since it broadens rather than restricts the gene pool.

From that point of view the objection to Targaryen marriage customs is not that they took multiple wives, but that some of those wives were their sisters and that if taking one sister to bed was bad then taking two sisters to bed was doubly bad. If they simply spread it around there probably wouldn't be so much fuss. The only difference between polygamy and marrying one woman and having another unrelated one on the side, is that in the latter case there's no dispute over inheritance - only the true-born children get the lands, titles and money as of right.