R+L=J v.124

[aDanceWithFlagons]

On the topic of who came first, Aegon would come before Jon, and then both Aegon and Jon would come before Viserys.

BUT, Viserys could come first if a few things happened

- The marriage between Elia and Rhaegar put aside due to her being barren, and Aegon declared a bastard. (I suppose at this point its assumed Aerys would be unaware of Jon).

Or more simply.

- Rhaegar and his line was dishinherited posthumously by Aerys himself the way that Aerion Brightflames was passed over.

It might be interesting in the case of the Starks if a son of Brandons did show up. One declaration of legitimacy by any king, and Neds line is done, but hopefully Martin won't get into the weeds with that scenario.

Yes, Aerys can name his own heir, and the World Book states he did just that. It makes good sense for Aerys to do so in his own mind. Not Dornish, not Rhaegar's son, and not a baby. Aerys also has his gladhanding anti-Rhaegar yes men to back him on his decisions.

[Ygrain]

On the topic of Aegon's supposed removal from the line of succession: if Aerys did indeed make such a decision, it seems that no-one in the series knows about it, most notably Viserys and Dany.

[BearQueen87]

I thought of that too, but there the idea is that they've always been secret bastards. That's different from Robert being unaware of the incest and setting Cersei aside and then declaring that because of that his children by her are now bastards and can't inherit.

Edit: I'm guessing that technically the king could declare anyone a bastard and that would be that, I just don't think it's ever happened to our knowledge.

I can't think of anyone either. The perfect opportunity would have been Daeron II un-legitimizing Bittersteel and Daemon Blackfyre since they were plagues to his existence (though, could he do that an keep Bloodraven "legit"??? Okay okay kings make their own rules...)

Happy New Year, to you and everyone else, which reminds me, it's time to shower and get ready. So not in the mood for this. Is really any different than a regular party night. You go out and you drink, you get fireworks and you lie to yourself about something are sure you will stop doing this year.

Resolution? Hmmmmmm I promise I will be? Nice to people I don't like. No that's not going to happen. I promise I will stop rolling my eyes when idiots speak. Nope that won;t happen either. I promise I will not get married and drive my mother bat shit crazy. Ohhhhhh I think I got a winner, though I am suppose to stop doing something, fuck! I'll, I'll... stop making resolutions I have no intention of keeping. That's the one.

Happy new year.

I won't lie...I'm already in my PJs and totally not going out. I find partying on New Year's to be silly.

I think you just created a paradox that'll destroy the universe. Thanks a lot.

Damn you, Ser Creighton. Damn you.

[RumHam]

If you want a RL example, that's what Henry did with the children of his wives who fell out of favour - completely removed them from the succession line

Right I know you can disinherit someone, but did he actually declare them illegitimate?

[BearQueen87]

On the topic of Aegon's supposed removal from the line of succession: if Aerys did indeed make such a decision, it seems that no-one in the series knows about it, most notably Viserys and Dany.

Right! This is what gets me. If Viserys had been declared Aerys' heir and someone told Viserys (and why wouldn't they) then Mr. I am the Dragon, No One Steals From the Dragon....would have been shouting it from the rooftops of Pentos. Loudly. And often.

[Ygrain]

Right I know you can disinherit someone, but did he actually declare them illegitimate?

Yes, he declared Mary a bastard, and IIRC, Elizabeth, as well.

[markg171]

Alys was running as Arnolf was trying to usurp her rights to Karhold, not because she necessarily didn't like the person. I doubt she did, but she ran so that they couldn't claim Karhold through her. There's nothing like that with Lyanna. Lyanna had 3 brothers and wasn't going to inherit anything, but marrying Robert did make her Lady of Storm's End. So if she ran from Robert, she ran from a Ladyship. Which is the complete opposite of Alys running from Arnolf to protect her Ladyship.

There's also nothing that suggests Lyanna didn't like Robert. Just that she didn't think he could stay faithful (which in hindsight is ironic seeing as 15 years later he's still holding onto her memory). In fact, from everything we know about young Robert, she probably did like him. He was tall, dark and handsome, muscled to hell, a renowned warrior, a Lord Paramount, charming, and her brother's best friend. He was everything someone could want and even Cersei, who we know for sure hated Robert, admitted that she thought Robert was amazing (and even comparable to Rhaegar I might add) up until he whispered Lyanna's name during their bedding. So Lyanna probably actually did like Robert and found him to be a suitable match, just didn't think he wouldn't father any bastards. Which is no reason to think that she'd run from their marriage.

[BearQueen87]

Alys was running as Arnolf was trying to usurp her rights to Karhold, not because she necessarily didn't like the person. I doubt she did, but she ran so that they couldn't claim Karhold through her. There's nothing like that with Lyanna. Lyanna had 3 brothers and wasn't going to inherit anything, but marrying Robert did make her Lady of Storm's End. So if she ran from Robert, she ran from a Ladyship. Which is the complete opposite of Alys running from Arnolf to protect her Ladyship.

Lyanna didn't like Robert and I doubt Lyanna had ladyship ambitions. This is the girl who wanted to wield a sword and would have, had Rickard let her.

There's also nothing that suggests Lyanna didn't like Robert.

Disagree. She didn't want to marry him because of his character (ie: siring bastards)

Just that she didn't think he could stay faithful (which in hindsight is ironic seeing as 15 years later he's still holding onto her memory)

To a false memory

1. In fact, from everything we know about young Robert, she probably did like him. He was tall, dark and handsome, muscled to hell, a renowned warrior, a Lord Paramount, charming, and her brother's best friend. He was everything someone could want

2. and even Cersei, who we know for sure hated Robert, admitted that she thought Robert was amazing (and even comparable to Rhaegar I might add) up until he whispered Lyanna's name during their bedding.

1. Because women are shallow and only care about looks........

2. What...? No. She even thinks that the wrong man came back from the Trident and that no one could match Rhaegar. Not even her precious Jaime.

[RumHam]

I can't think of anyone either. The perfect opportunity would have been Daeron II un-legitimizing Bittersteel and Daemon Blackfyre since they were plagues to his existence (though, could he do that an keep Bloodraven "legit"??? Okay okay kings make their own rules...)

He was conscientious in his duties to the realm and sought to stabilize it in the wake of Aegon’s deathbed decree, which legitimized all his bastard half siblings. Although he could not

—and would not—rescind his father’s last wishes, he did what he could to keep the Great Bastards close, treating them honorably and continuing the incomes that the king had bestowed on them. He paid the dowry that Aegon had promised to the Archon of Tyrosh, thereby seeing his half brother Daemon Blackfyre wed to Rohanne of Tyrosh as Aegon had desired, for all that Ser Daemon was only four-and-ten. On their wedding day, he granted Daemon a tract of land near the Blackwater, with the right to raise a castle. Some said he did such things to assert his rule and legitimacy over the Great Bastards, and others because he was kind and just.

So despite the fact that "what one king does another can undo" for some reason Daeron II could not undo the legitimizations. Maybe that tells us that the king of the Seven Kingdoms can't un-legitimize someone.

On the topic of Aegon's supposed removal from the line of succession: if Aerys did indeed make such a decision, it seems that no-one in the series knows about it, most notably Viserys and Dany.

There are only two or three times it might have come up naturally, and it doesn't seem odd to me that it didn't. It's possible Viserys didn't even know, apparently they didn't think he was old enough to know about his wedding pact. It's also possible Viserys knew and never told Daenerys because it ended up being a moot point. (The same reason nobody else ever mentions it.)

There's also the possibility that it's a minor retcon, we know these have happened before. Maybe when coming up with material for the worldbook Martin realized that it made no sense for Aerys to leave Aegon as heir given his Dornish concerns. Maybe he felt it would dissuade some people from the idea that Jon was the rightful king in a red herringish way.

[BearQueen87]

So despite the fact that "what one king does another can undo" for some reason Daeron II could not undo the legitimizations. Maybe that tells us that the king of the Seven Kingdoms can't un-legitimize someone.

Dunno. It might just speak to Daeron's character. He relied quite heavily on Bloodraven (and Daeron was just a "good" (pun intended) bloke) and it would look rather silly to un-legitimize Blackfyre and Bittersteel but not BR when BR is basically running half the show.

[RumHam]

Dunno. It might just speak to Daeron's character. He relied quite heavily on Bloodraven (and Daeron was just a "good" (pun intended) bloke) and it would look rather silly--and D2 is sans dragons--to un-legitimize Blackfyre and Bittersteel but not BR

I would go with this line of thinking too, but it says "could not AND would not," you know?

[markg171]

A son always comes before an uncle, a daughter does unless we're talking about the Iron Throne. The only reason Viserys would be ahead of Jon is if Aerys proclaimed him his heir as the worldbook indicates.

Except Viserys is the son. An uncle would be Aerys' brother.

The question is who was Aerys' heir, not who was Rhaegar's heir. Aerys was king, not Rhaegar. Jon and Aegon are Rhaegar's heirs, and Viserys is their uncle yes. But Viserys was Aerys' son. Which means it's actually a completely different situation than saying a "son comes before an uncle" as here Viserys is the son.

[JonSnow4President]

Lyanna didn't like Robert and I doubt Lyanna had ladyship ambitions. This is the girl who wanted to wield a sword and would have, had Rickard let her.

Disagree. She didn't want to marry him because of his character (ie: siring bastards)

To a false memory

1. Because women are shallow and only care about looks........

2. What...? No. She even thinks that the wrong man came back from the Trident and that no one could match Rhaegar. Not even her precious Jaime.

IIRC, she says something about how amazing he was when she first saw him, and how happy she was. I think she would think the same of Wyman Manderly if he was the one about to make a queen out of her, but there was a time when some part of Cersei seemed to love Robert (or more likely the title that went with it). However, it ended pretty damn quick.

[JonCon's Red Beard]

I have the feeling that the whole disinheritance of Rhaegar was not something Aerys did, but that the Council wanted to do so they could be Viserys' regents. I've been planning to do a Rhaegar re-read, but ONLY considering the politics of KL (and just a few of including Jon and Lyanna). It'll have to wait for next year (badum tsss!). If it's something worthy of some few paragraphs I might put it here.

I'm already getting ready for NYE, which I hate, but my son loves. We have enough fireworks to put the Doom of Valyria to shame. I wanted to buy this ("Rain of Fire") and others called "Dragon eggs" but those were not egg-shaped so no. We still have enough to make Aerys very proud.

So, happy new year, RLJers :P /o/

[BearQueen87]

I would go with this line of thinking too, but it says "could not AND would not," you know?

I agree. I also think it's worth noting that D2 is on shaky-ish ground given the rumor about his own parentage.

IIRC, she says something about how amazing he was when she first saw him, and how happy she was. I think she would think the same of Wyman Manderly if he was the one about to make a queen out of her, but there was a time when some part of Cersei seemed to love Robert (or more likely the title that went with it). However, it ended pretty damn quick.

Even her darling Jaime paled beside Rhaegar...or something like that.

Also, if we're going with this some what rude and insulting "women like a big strong handsome man and there is no reason why Lyanna wouldn't love Robert..." bullshit...well Rhaegar's ain't exactly swiss cheese if you get what I'm saying.

[BearQueen87]

I have the feeling that the whole disinheritance of Rhaegar was not something Aerys did, but that the Council wanted to do so they could be Viserys' regents. I've been planning to do a Rhaegar re-read, but ONLY considering the politics of KL (and just a few of including Jon and Lyanna). It'll have to wait for next year (badum tsss!). If it's something worthy of some few paragraphs I might put it here.

I VOLUNTEER!!!! I VOLUNTEER AS TRIBUTE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[markg171]

No need to apologise, it's just that the historical parallels are quite a few (speaking of the Tudors, Aerys has strong Henry VIII vibes).

Besides, even if you look at civil law, the rights of an unborn child are never dismissed.

In law unborn children don't actually have any rights. Their rights occur at birth and then can be used from a legal stand point for sanctions or anything that occurred during pregnancy (i.e sue the mother for drinking and causing Fetal Alcohol Syndrome). But until they're born, they have no rights.

Which is exactly what we see with Edmure and his child in the story. Edmure is kept alive up until his child is born, and then the Freys plan to kill him so that Riverrun can be the child's. But the child doesn't have a claim on Riverrun until it's born.

[Ser Leftwich]

IIRC, she says something about how amazing he was when she first saw him, and how happy she was. I think she would think the same of Wyman Manderly if he was the one about to make a queen out of her, but there was a time when some part of Cersei seemed to love Robert (or more likely the title that went with it). However, it ended pretty damn quick.

Robert had been handsome enough when they first married, tall and strong and powerful, but his hair was black and heavy, thick on his chest and coarse around his sex. The wrong man came back from the Trident, the queen would sometimes think as he was plowing her. In the first few years, when he mounted her more often, she would close her eyes and pretend that he was Rhaegar. - AFfC p. 481

[RumHam]

Except Viserys is the son. An uncle would be Aerys' brother.

The question is who was Aerys' heir, not who was Rhaegar's heir. Aerys was king, not Rhaegar. Jon and Aegon are Rhaegar's heirs, and Viserys is their uncle yes. But Viserys was Aerys' son. Which means it's actually a completely different situation than saying a "son comes before an uncle" as here Viserys is the son.

That post was meant as a reply to Twinslayer saying Jon was confused about the uncle issue. It's also totally accurate, just don't couple the two sentences in your mind.

Jon would totally come before Viserys if he was legitimate and Aerys hadn't explicitly said otherwise. It doesn't matter that Rhaegar died before his father.

[markg171]

On the topic of Aegon's supposed removal from the line of succession: if Aerys did indeed make such a decision, it seems that no-one in the series knows about it, most notably Viserys and Dany.

Why would he need to mention it? He was the last one left. No matter what, he was the "rightful" Targaryen king.